


















Class 

pT I 1 0 ! 

o 

o 

r~ r- 

r "'• 

— «— W. V. 


GoipglitJJ® 


COHfRIGHT DEPOSm 










Religion— Faith— The Church 

A Series of 
Apologetic Discourses 

BY 

CANON Pw^*EINIG, D.D. 

I) 


NEW YORK 

JOSEPH F. WAGNER, Inc. 
LONDON: B. HERDER 



ARTHUR J. SCANLAN, S. T. D. 

Censor Librorum 


Stnprimatur 

^ PATRICK J. HAYES, D. D. 

Archbishop of New York 


New York, August 5, 1919 



Copyright, 1919, by Joseph F. Wagner, New York 


.-EB 26 1920 

©CU559841 

M 'S I 


CONTENTS 


PAGE 

1. The Nature and Truth of Religion i 

2. Religion and Honesty of Life 8 

3. Indifference to Religion 15 

4. The Meaning and Possibility of Revelation 22 

5. The Advantage and Necessity of Revelation 28 

6 . The Possibility of Miracles 36 

7. Demonstrability of Miracles, and the Force of Their Evidence 44 

8. Prophecies as Tokens of the Revelation 52 

9. Prophecies Relating to Our Lord’s Passion 59 

10. Christ’s Resurrection the Proof of His Divine Mission . . 6$ 

11. Miraculous Growth of Christianity 71 

12. The Transforming Power of Christianity 79 

13. The Indestructibility of Christianity 87 

14. A Martyrdom 96 

15. Authenticity of the Gospels 103 

16. Credibility of the Gospels 112 

17. The Divine Origin of Holy Scripture 120 

18. Bible and Nature 128 

19. Bible and Babel 136 

20. The Bible and the Church 143 

21. Tradition as a Source of Faith . 152 




> 


\ 


I 

/ 


• r 


% 


N 




k 


s 


> 


I 




r* I 
t •“ I 

. i 



'VM 




I 

i 


1 


I 




> ' 


. I 


i 


. r‘ 

t i 


V ) ' 


■I *t 




k . Vsr ' 


K • ^ 


\ 


^ • 


/ 


4 


I 


/ 


I 




• \ 


0 


> 



S 


♦ 



4 


/ 








RELIGION — FAITH— THE CHURCH 


A SERIES OF APOLOGETIC DISCOURSES 
I. The Nature and Truth of Religion 

'‘What is your attitude towards religion ?’" — we often hear this 
question at the present day, for men are keenly interested in religious 
questions, the newspapers devote much space to discussing them, 
and no other topics have such power to awaken excitement at public 
and even political gatherings. On every side we hear allusions to 
sermons and lectures, and this is a good sign, since those were merely 
false prophets who maintained religion to be good for the human 
race as long as it was still in its infancy, but unnecessary when 
mankind had attained to full maturity. On the contrary, we have 
absolute proof that religion continues to be indispensable even after 
science, art and industry have reached their highest perfection, and 
again and again we realize the truth of Proudhon’s remark, that 
some point of religion ultimately underlies all other questions. At 
first sight this appears strange, but it is really so. We do not think 
it strange that a plant cannot live without sap, nor an animal without 
blood, and we admit that life would cease altogether unless the sun 
shone in the firmament. Yet religion is to the human heart pre- 
cisely what the sap is to a plant, the blood to an animal, and the sun 
to animate existence. “But,” some one may say, “what do you 
mean by religion? May it not after all be merely a human inven- 
tion?” We must answer these questions carefully. 

I. Not even infidels can deny that every nation in every age has 
possessed some kind of religion, i. e., a belief in one or many gods, 

I 


2 


RELIGION— FAITH— THE CHURCH 


and a manifestation of this belief by means of oracles, prayers and 
sacrifices. The cuneiform inscriptions of Assyria and the hiero- 
glyphics of Egypt contain religious records, whilst the earliest poetry 
of the Hindoos and Greeks is the outcome of religious feeling. 
Men^s first attempts at artistic representation were intended to .serve 
some religious end, and wherever we meet with religion, it is not 
something accidental and of secondary importance, but it occupies 
a prominent and significant position in national life. It is in fact 
co-eval with the human race itself, and the history of mankind is 
essentially the history of their religion. This is true of both civil- 
ized and uncivilized nations. From time to time some explorer has 
fancied that he has discovered a race devoid of all religion, but in 
every case subsequent research has proved this to be a mistake, and 
occasionally races said to have no religion have been found to 
possess more practical religious sense than some of those would-be 
explorers, who seem to have carried on their investigations in their 
own homes. Of course there are tribes amongst whom the knowl- 
edge of religion is very slightly developed or is terribly distorted, 
but still we everywhere find faith in a Supreme Being, a Great Spirit, 
and recognition of men’s dependence upon the same. This is re- 
ligion, though it may be, and often is, overgrown with foolish super- 
stitions and repulsive forms of witchcraft. Plutarch, a pagan, was 
right when he said: ‘‘You may see a town without walls, but you 
will never discover a nation without God, without prayer and without 
sacrifice.” Cicero, too, remarked with truth that no nation was so 
barbarous as not to need faith in a divinity. At the present time, 
when all the races on the face of the earth are more or less known, 
we can make the same assertion with even greater assurance. 

What does this fact prove? We cannot suppose that every nation 
in every age has found religion an easy matter, gratifying to men’s 


THE NATURE AND TRUTH OF RELIGION 


3 


natural feelings of pride and self-indulgence. It is impossible that 
religion should be nothing but the outcome of human imagination 
and ingenuity; it is indispensable to the mind and essential to every 
rational being. No laborious course of study is necessary to enable 
a man to know God and to recognize the importance of religion 
which is the link between himself and his Maker. It is enough for 
the most ignorant savage to possess sight and hearing and the use 
of reason. If, like Minutius Felix, a man raises his eyes and ob- 
serves the sky above him, sparkling at night with countless stars, 
and traversed by day by the sun in all his majesty and glory; if he 
considers the alternation of light and darkness, of heat and cold, 
he is forced to ask who created all these things. In very truth “the 
heavens declare the glory of God, and the firmament proclaimeth 
His handiwork.^’ If on the other hand he fixes his gaze on the earth, 
and sees the beautiful flowers in spring, the rich fruits in summer 
and the glistening snow in winter, — if he looks at the sea and the 
rivers, and studies the marvels of animal and vegetable life, he will 
eventually perceive that he himself is appointed to rule over all the 
good things of nature, and — provided that he is not what the Wise 
Man calls “foolish beyond measure,” he will involuntarily ask: 
“Who gave me all these gifts?” And if he has but a spark of 
honesty and gratitude in his character, he will fling himself down 
and exclaim : “It is God who hath made us and not we ourselves ; 
He hath bestowed on us all that we have; to Him be praise and 
glory.” — Even without the use of sight and hearing, it would be 
possible for a man to know God and possess some kind of religion, 
if he withdrew into the depths of his own consciousness. St. 
Augustine says very beautifully (Conf. I, lo) : “I listened to God 
as one listens in the silence of his heart, and I should question my 
own existence rather than that of God.” — Do you never hear Him? 


4 


RELIGION— FAITH-^THE CHURCH 


has His voice never been audible when you were alone ? has nothing 
ever told you that some action would be wrong? and if nevertheless 
you have performed it, have you felt no self-reproach? The voice 
that you heard was not your own but God^s, and it was so clear and 
loud that you might more reasonably doubt your own existence 
than His. Like St. Augustine you are forced to admit : “I listened 
to God, as one listens in the silence of his heart.” — Yes, all within 
and around us proclaims to us His existence and the truth and 
necessity of religion, and the utterance of our own heart is the one 
that we are least able to stifle. The human heart has been well 
compared with the mysterious pillar in Egypt, that stood, we are 
told, in the midst of the desert. As soon as the sun rose, and 
lighted up the pillar, wonderful sounds proceeded from its interior. 
The heart often seems lonely and abandoned, but no sooner does 
a ray from God's infinite glory fall upon it than the sweetest strains 
are called forth, and man is constrained to fall down in adoration 
crying: God, Thou art my God.” 

2. What do we understand by religion? — It is now less difficult 
to answer that question. D. F. Strauss declares sentiment and 
imagination to be the parents of religion, and it is a remarkable fact 
that very many non-Catholic theologians agree with him, infidel as 
he was. Schleiermacher considered it to be merely a matter of 
sentiment, a vague consciousness of our dependence. Ritschl pro- 
nounced it to be an affair of the imagination, striving to render us 
independent of this world. No, so far from this being true religion, 
it is absolutely exclusive of it. A morbid sort of piety is sometimes 
inclined to seek religion in our feelings, and especially in inward 
joy and consolation, but this too is a mistake. Our feelings and 
imagination, being under God's control, may be used by Him in the 
service of religion ; and consolation is a precious gift, for which we 


THE NATURE AND TRUTH OF RELIGION 


S 


should thank Him when He bestows it; but these things dor not 
constitute religion. St. Paul gives us the correct definition, when 
he calls it reasonable service. Religion concerns the reason, which 
tells us that there can be no effect without a cause, and that if the 
effect is perfect, the cause also must be perfect. Now I see many 
things, and belong myself to their number, which do not exist of 
themselves, but through something else, and ultimately there is one 
Thing, which does exist of itself and is the cause of all other things 
I perceive everywhere regularity and order, and recognize the fact 
that the final cause of all things can be nothing but an intelligent 
and infinitely wise and good Spirit. In this way my reason teaches 
me that God is my Creator, and it goes on to show me that He is 
also my Lord and Master, for I am dependent upon Him, and owe 
Him thanks, and need His help; and that when He speaks I must 
listen ; when He commands I must obey. Thus reason is the found- 
ation of religion, and it is a remarkable fact that although men 
continually accuse the Catholic Church of undervaluing reason, it 
is precisely this Church which insists upon the capability of reason 
to know God by its own powers. Other religious bodies, while 
professing to attach greater importance to reason, deny it this ability, 
but at the last Council of the Church the rights of reason were de- 
clared to be an article of faith. Religion is reason ; but it does not 
follow that our reason is capable of grasping all that religion 
teaches, although, even where it is incapable, its rights are still re- 
spected and the doctrines of religion are shown to be at least rea- 
sonable. 

For instance, it is reasonable to have faith in God and in 
the mysteries that He has revealed. It is impossible to despise 
religion, for it is the reasonable service of God, but religion is not 
merely a matter of intellect, for in that case a theologian, who can 


6 


RELIGION— FAITH— THE CHURCH 


penetrate deeply into God^s nature and discuss it eloquently, would 
have more religion than an ignorant man. A poor laborer, sweep- 
ing the streets in the early morning, may possess more real religion 
than a profound scholar. Religion is the reasonable service of 
God, as the apostle says. Now what faculty is .there in man which 
worships, obeys and serves ? It is the will, and therefore the human 
will must belong to God, that will which, being free, is God’s most 
precious gift to man in the natural order. It behooves the will to 
act in conformity with God’s will and to accept all that He orders. 
This surrender of the human will to God is a truly religious act, and 
when we examine it closely we find it to be an act of love, and so 
religion proves ultimately to be love of God. Such was our 
Saviour’s teaching, when He bade us love God with all our hearts 
and love our neighbor as ourselves, for this, as He said, is the whole 
law, the whole of religion. “Love God,” exclaims St. Augustine, 
“and then do as thou wilt.” He did not mean that of a man who 
loved God, nothing else was required, no church-going and no re- 
ception of the Sacraments ; he meant that one who loved God would 
of his own accord do all that God commanded. All else would fol- 
low as a matter of course, for the one thing enjoined by religion is 
to love Him. 

Sometimes religion is called the link between God and man, and 
it does indeed involve a mutual seeking and finding; man asks and 
God answers ; man prays and God hears his prayer ; man repents and 
God forgives; they are inseparable, but the best thing in man is 
his power to love, or, in other words, ♦his religion, which is funda- 
mentally very obvious and simple. A father takes his child into 
his arms and gazes into its eyes, seeing in them the reflection of him- 
self ; in the joy of his heart he exclaims : “My child, mine own !” and 
the little one responds with the one word “Father.” God takes each 


THE NATURE AND TRUTH OF RELIGION 


7 


of US into His arms and calls us His children. Would that we 
never turned away from Him, refusing to listen to His voice! 
Let us at least now and then look into His eyes, especially when in 
the silence of our hearts He says: “My child, give Me thy heart.” 
He has a right to what He asks; let us never refuse His request, 
but answer gladly : “Yes, my God and my Father, I will give Thee 
my heart.” This is true religion, which will bring us peace and 
happiness in this life, and, in the world to come, eternal bliss. 


3 


RSLIGION-FAITH^THE CHURCH 


II. Religion and Honesty of Life 

We are told how St. Augustine, one of the greatest men who 
ever lived, stood once by the seashore watching the waves and 
the sun gradually sinking below the horizon. Overwhelmed by 
the beauties of nature he exclaimed : ocean, sun and nature, can 

ye give me peace But he received no answer, only the waves 
continued to rise and fall, as if suggesting that all earthly things, 
like them, were unstable and incapable of affording peace to the 
soul. St. Augustine raised his eyes to the cloudless heavens, and 
watched the stars shining in the firmament, and again he asked 
whether peace were to be found in their midst, and they seemed 
to reply that they, like all the bright and fair things of nature, 
must fade away after a few hours’ radiance, and that true peace 
must be sought elsewhere. On the wings of thought the Saint 
rose to a still greater height, and continued his quest for peace 
among the glorious spirits around the throne of God, only to be 
told that they, too, were creatures, and that nothing created, not 
even the most exalted knowledge and art, could satisfy the craving 
of his soul. At last he turned to God, and there found what he 
desired, and, falling down in adoration exclaimed: “O Lord, Thou 
hast created ils for Thyself, and our hearts can find no rest, until 
they rest in Thee” (Conf., x, 6; iv, lo). 

What St. Augustine here records of himself is more or less the 
experience of us all. Countless voices around us and one clear 
voice within us cry unceasingly: *Thou dost belong to God, and 
in Him alone canst thou find peace.” Yes, we belong to God, and 
are united with Him most closely by the bond of faith, which 
prompts us to keep His Commandments. Here we have the very 


RELIGION AND HONESTY OF LIFE 


9 


•ssence of religion and it is something quite obvious and natural. 
None of us doubt this truth; your presence here and your desire 
to hear God's word are evidence of your faith, but you know well 
enough that all men are not of the same mind. Many will tell 
you that they see no use in going to church, or in listening to 
sermons, or in practicing religion. They commit no flagrant sins; 
they are not thieves or murderers, and, in their opinion, they need 
no religion, and God will be satisfied if they lead decent, honest 
lives. Possibly this might be true, if they really led decent, honest 
lives, but it is impossible to do this without the aid of religion — 
we must be quite clear on this point: — without religion there can 
be no honesty and decency of life, and consequently religion is not 
only of very great assistance in leading a moral life, but it is the 
one and only foundation of morality. 

I. What do we mean by honesty? Who is honest? We call 
a man honest who acts straightforwardly. Now it is absolutely 
certain that God exists, and that from Him we receive all that 
we have and are, and that without God our hearts can never 
enjoy peace. It is also just and right that we should acknowl- 
edge this God to be our Lord and Master, honoring Him and giv- 
ing Him thanks. It is true beyond all question that this same 
God has spoken to us through the Patriarchs and Prophets, and 
lastly through His Son, and that He can neither lie nor deceive; 
therefore it is our bounden duty to believe His words and to obey 
His Commandments. It may be beyond our comprehension, but it 
is nevertheless true, that God made us His children and Himself 
became our Father in virtue of the race which His Son obtained 
for us by His Passion and death. Consequently God has a per- 
fect right to claim our reverence. It is also true that Jesus Christ 
founded a Church, and said to those appointed to rule it: “He 


10 


RELIGION— FAITH— THE CHURCH 


that heareth you, heareth me.’’ Must we not therefore honor and 
love this holy Church as our mother? How can any one dare to 
assert that he needs no religion, provided that he leads a good life ? 
How is it possible for him to lead a good life without religion? 
Even if he commits no flagrant sins, he is obviously neglecting his 
paramount and most sacred duty, and is a sinner, though he may 
not kill or steal. A thief robs his neighbor of his property and a 
murderer deprives him of his life, and these are undoubtedly griev- 
ous sins; but a man who has no religion, who refuses to recognize 
God and despises His Commandments, is actually robbing the 
Infinite God of the honor that is His due, and this must be a far 
more grievous offence. It is an act of treason against God, and 
this is why, when the Commandments were given on Mount Sinai, 
amidst thunder and lightning. He began by ordering men to serve 
and reverence Himself, so that the Commandments regarding our 
duty towards God take precedence of those regarding our duty 
towards our fellowmen. How then can it be possible to lead a good 
life and yet disobey the solemn injunction: “I am the Lord thy 
God ; thou shalt have no other gods beside Me ?” It is absurd even 
to speak of a good life without God and religion. 

2. An upright man’s first duty is towards God, and his loyalty 
to this duty is the best guarantee that he will fulfil his other 
duties, so that religion is the best and firmest foundation of all 
uprightness. The earliest Christian authors do not hesitate to refer 
to the good lives of Christians as evidence of the truth of their 
religion. St. Justin, Martyr, appealed to the pagans in these words : 
“Since we have been the servants of the one true God, we have 
become different men. We used to abandon ourselves to riotous 
living, but now are temperate and sober. Formerly we refrained 
from no means of acquiring wealth, but now we share our pos- 


RELIGION AND HONESTY OF LIFE 


II 


sessions with the needy. Formerly we hated and slew one another, 
but now we love one another, and pray even for our enemies. All 
this is the result of our religion” (Apol., i, 14). 

Tertullian exclaimed to the pagans of his own day : ‘The prisons 
are always full of people from your midst, and you sit in judgment 
on the Christians, but when were you ever able to convict a Chris- 
tian of theft, adultery or murder? We are condemned simply as 
Christians, and if we could be convicted of any other offence, we 
should no longer be true Christians. Even your financiers owe 
a debt of gratitude to the Christians for paying their taxes honestly 
for conscience’s sake” (Apol., 44). 

These champions of Christianity were right, and we need not 
wonder that they were so, since, wherever true religion and gen- 
uine Christianity prevail, it is comparatively easy to avoid evil and 
to practice virtue. If the tempter assails you, you will remember 
that God sees you, and will punish you if you sin, and this thought 
will help you to gain the victory. If some one offends you, and 
you are roused to anger, you will call to mind the Lord’s words: 
“Vengeance is mine,” and if this does not suffice, you will look at 
the Crucifix and think how our Saviour said: “Father, forgive 
them, for they know not what they do,” and then you will be able 
to forgive your enemy. When troubles and poverty incline you to 
lose courage, you must remember Heaven, where God will wipe 
away all tears from our eyes, and should you still be weighed down 
with sorrow, turn to the crib at Bethlehem, and consider how your 
God became poor and outwardly insignificant for your sake. Per- 
haps you have fallen into sin, and your conscience gives you no rest, 
and within you there is a voice that bids you rely on God’s mercy 
and have recourse to the tribunal that He in His goodness has 
established, and His minister will pronounce the words of absolu- 


RELIGION-^FAITH-^THE CHURCH 


tion over you, so that you may depart comforted and relieved of 
your burden. Then you can approach the altar and partake of the 
food of the strong, that will enable you to walk manfully on the 
path of virtue. It is true of course that we live in a wicked world, 
and are but weak mortals, yet is it not much easier for us Christians 
to do our duty than for others? Would it not be astounding if 
we did not lead better lives than the rest of mankind? A statis- 
tician tells us that it is possible to prove that crime increases where 
there is no religion; of every hundred prisoners, fifty are abso- 
lutely indifferent to religion, forty are infidels, and only ten are 
practical Christians. We have no desire to praise ourselves, but we 
cannot help saying that we Christians, and especially we Catholics, 
must inevitably be more moral, since others have not such power- 
ful motives and effectual means for overcoming their own weakness 
and practicing heroic virtues. 

3. Religion is the firmest foundation, or rather the sole foun- 
dation of morality. Even Cicero, a pagan, knew this, for he said : 
'T do not think that loyalty and faith and human society and the 
idea of justice could continue to exist, if piety and religion disap- 
peared” (Cic. de nat. deor., i, 2). Nothing good can ejtist without 
religion, nor is this surprising, when men have trampled their 
most sacred obligations under foot. Those devoid of religion need 
not necessarily be thieves or murderers; there are many other 
things that they ought not to be; and there is much good which 
those who have no religion are unable to accomplish. We are 
bound to obey our parents, to lead moral lives, to be honest in 
business, charitable to the poor, modest in prosperity, patient in 
adversity: — can we do all this without the aid of legion? What 
will become of us when our passions run riot, and our interests 
clash with our duties? Will the voice of reason suffice to keep us 


RELIGION AND HONESTY OF LIFE 


13 


on the right path? We are told that it behooves us to do right 
for its own sake, and to practice virtue because it is beautiful. This 
is all very well, but in the ears of most people it is but a specious 
argument, incapable of suppressing a sinful desire or of deterring 
a man from sin. Any one with the slightest knowledge of human 
nature knows that this is true, and Napoleon I., who possessed a 
profound insight into the characters of men, remarked that but for 
the restraint imposed by religion, human beings would kill one 
another for the sake of a juicy pear or a pretty woman. What 
would become of morality without religion ? You have all heard of 
the modern, up-to-date kind of morality, and Nietzsche, who is con- 
sidered by his admirers to have been the greatest philosopher who 
ever lived, was filled with a perfectly diabolical hatred of all re- 
ligion and especially of Christianity. He set to work to preach a 
new form of morality, that of the superman, totally unlike the doc- 
trines of Christ. The first principle of Nietzsche’s teaching is 
that everything is lawful; humility must give way to pride, self- 
denial to self-indulgence. The weak should be trampled down, not 
pitied, and the superman alone should reign supreme. This is the 
new morality, the exaltation of brute force, or, as its founder said, 
of the blonde beast. Surely these are terrible doctrines, and we 
may well prefer to abide by the teaching of Bethlehem and Calvary, 
which inculcates charity and compassion. 

My Brethren, love and respect religion, and teach your children 
to do the same. Remember that it is the one foundation of all 
goodness, and that no one can lead a really good life without the 
support of religion, whilst it is equally impossible for religion to 
be complete unless it manifests itself in a moral life. The first 
three Commandments refer to God Himself, and our duty towards 
Him, but there are seven others no less important. A religion 


14 


RELIGION— FAITH— THE CHURCH 


that did not result in goodness of life would be no true religion at 
all; it would be, as it were, a tree devoid of leaves, blossoms and 
fruit, whose root was rotten or whose sap had ceased to flow. 
St. James goes so far as to say: *'If any man think himself to be 
religious, not bridling his tongue, but deceiving his own heart, this 
man’s religion is vain” (i, 26). Thus the Apostle condemns all 
profession of religion if one virtue fails to be cultivated, and a 
religion without any results would not be worth anything. No 
greater disgrace can be imagined than for unbelievers to be able 
to say to us: ‘These pious people are no better than we are.” 
They are only too prone to criticize our works and judge our re- 
ligion by our actions. This may not be altogether fair, but it is 
frequently done, and, therefore, it behooves us not only to have our 
religion, but to live in accordance with its precepts. We ought to 
be patient, gentle, honest, kind and charitable, remembering how 
St. James bids us be doers of the Word and not hearers only. 


INDIFFERENCE TO RELIGION 


IS 


III. Indifference to Religion 

Lessing represents Nathan the Wise as telling the story of a 
man in the Far East who owned a ring of priceless worth, con- 
taining an opal, that flashed with exquisite colors and was capable 
of making its owner pleasing to God and man. When he was on 
his deathbed he could not decide to which of his three sons to 
bequeath the ring, since he loved them all equally. Consequently, 
he ordered a jeweller to make him two other rings, precisely simi- 
lar to that which had the miraculous power, and then each son 
received a ring, and each believed his own to be the original. Nathan 
concludes the story by saying that it was almost as impossible to 
prove which was the original ring as it is for us now to show which 
is the true Faith. The precious ring that makes men pleasing to 
God is religion, but which religion? There are more than one, 
and many people feel inclined to agree with Nathan, and say that 
the truth cannot be ascertained. What then is the good of troubling 
about it? Is it not better to be indifferent to all religions? Prob- 
ably all are good, and the best course is to adhere to the religion in 
which one happens to be born. Leave others to work out their 
salvation and to believe what they choose; it behooves us to be tol- 
erant. We hear such language almost every day, but is it justifiable ? 
No, it is wrong, thoroughly wrong, and it is strange that Lessing 
did not perceive the folly of his story of the three rings, since as a 
rule he was ready enough to expose mercilessly the follies of others. 
You are well aware that there is only one true religion, and that this 
fact is perfectly capable of demonstration; therefore to be indif- 
ferent to it is sheer folly and sin, but in condemning indifference to 
religion we are far from inculcating intolerance towards those of 


REUGI0N--FA1TH—THE CHURCH 


i6 

another faith. You know that it is our duty to be friendly and 
tolerant towards others, no matter what religion they profess, and, 
what is more, we should be charitable. You know the story of the 
Good Samaritan, who saw a man professing another faith lying 
wounded and half dead by the wayside, and he was moved with 
compassion, and going up to him, bound up his wounds, pouring in 
oil and wine. Our religion teaches us to act thus; but to-day we 
are concerned with facts, not with individuals, and we may safely 
assert that indifference to religion is both foolish and sinful. 

I. You have doubtless noticed how intolerant some people are, 
especially the declared enemies of religion. The very mention of 
religion is enough to excite them, and the sight of a cassock 
is to them like a red rag to a bull. They are far from in- 
different, and others, too, who delight in talking about their own 
toleration, are often by no means indifferent. It often happens that 
in society Protestants and apostate Catholics abuse the Church, her 
organization and her ministers, knowing all the time that you are 
Catholics. They think that you ought to agree with them, or at 
least to say nothing, and if you protest, you are regarded as intol- 
erant. Some scoffer or infidel may speak against our Lord and His 
blessed Mother, and expects you to listen in silence. Another per- 
haps tries to enlighten you, and to show that you are descended 
from apes, and that there never was a God who created all things. 
If you remonstrate, you are condemned as narrow-minded, and it 
is taken for granted that you ought to accept all these theories with 
respect. 

Toleration, in the usual meaning of the word, seems to re- 
quire the friends of religion to keep silence on all occasions, 
whilst its enemies are at liberty to say what they like, to utter abuse 
and falsehoods, and to despise what we hold sacred. Is not this 


INDIFFERENCE TO RELIGION 

really intolerance? Is there not a contradiction here? Yes, in- 
deed, for the truth is that indifference is permissible on every other 
subject, but not on matters of religion. After all, it is quite natural 
that this should be so. Religion touches us too closely and is too 
intimately connected with our innermost being and our essential in- 
terests for us ever to be really indifferent to it. Men are either 
the friends or the foes of religion, but few are indifferent to it, and 
those few are as a rule very simple, ignorant souls, amongst 
whom we must refuse to be numbered. How can any one assert 
that all religions are true and equally good? Can it really be the 
same thing to believe in many gods and in one ? to maintain and to 
deny the Divinity of Christ? to look upon the Pope as Anti-Christ 
and to venerate him as the Vicar of Christ, to whom our Lord 
entrusted His sheep and lambs? to believe that Christ’s Body and 
Blood are really present in the consecrated Host and Chalice, and 
to think that there is nothing present but bread and wine ? To any 
one who can see no differences here, black and white, light and 
darkness, truth and falsehood must all be identical. We are forced 
to wonder how men can be so blind. If you ask for butter in a 
shop, and they give you margarine, you are dissatisfied. If yo^ 
ask for wine, and receive some sort of concoction with no wine in 
it, you are angry. If some one who owes you money, pays you in 
bad coins, is it all the same to you? No, you are not so foolish; 
it is only in matters of religion that we are expected to be stupid 
enough to believe that all religions are equally good. But people 
tell us, like Nathan in the story, that it cannot be proved which is 
the genuine thing. Possibly all religions may not be equally good, 
but who, they say, is to prove which is the best and truest religion ? 

It may not always be easy for each individual to distinguish truth 
and error. Some people are not sufficiently educated; others have 


RELIGION-^FAITH—THE CHURCH 


it 

grown up in the midst of prejudices, which to some extent obscure 
their judgment; but is it really impossible to discriminate between 
the true religion and its spurious imitations? No, we have an in- 
fallible means of discrimination. We see the difference between 
natural and artificial flowers, however skilfully the latter may be 
made, and surely we are capable of distinguishing the pure gold 
of the true religion, the fragrant flower of faith, from creeds de- 
vised by mere mortals ! On all sides we hear of the achievements of 
the human intellect, and the enemies of religion maintain that the 
powers of the mind know no limitation, only when religion is men- 
tioned they protest that it is impossible to discover the truth. They 
say that we can know everything except the one thing most natural 
and indispensible, the one thing for which our hearts crave in their 
quest of happiness, the one thing without which we can have peace 
neither in this world not the next. Those who say that none can 
discover the genuine ring, or, in other words, the true religion, have 
indeed a poor opinion of human nature, though they profess in their 
folly to exalt it above God and His revelation. If we cannot know 
the true religion, we cannot know anything, and we shall end by 
doubting all truths, and finally agree with Nietzsche’s dogma “Noth- 
ing is true.” When once this has been accepted, it is but a step to 
the further horrible doctrine: “All is permissible,” and man sinks 
to the level of the beasts. In such a case as this, how true are the 
Psalmist’s words; “Man, when he was in honor, did not under- 
stand; he hath been compared to senseless beasts, and is become 
like to them” (Ps., xlviii, 13). 

2. Indifference to religion is opposed to all reason, and involves 
the utmost degradation of human nature, besides being an out- 
rageous insult to God. In his treatise on the expediency of faith 
(De utilitate cred. 16) St. Augustine says : “If there is a God and a 


INDIFFERENCE TO RELIGION 


19 


Divine Providence that cares for men, and if God desires man to 
seek and find Him, we may be quite sure that He has provided 
means whereby man may know where and how to discover Him/* 

If we are anxious that strangers in our midst may not lose their 
way, we set up signposts at every spot where they could go astray, 
first on the highroads, then on the lanes, and finally on the field-paths, 
which may be thought short cuts. Our infinitely good and merci- 
ful God acts in the same way and He could not do otherwise. In 
the first place, our reason tells us that there is but one God, and 
that it is our duty to serve Him. This is the first signpost. Next 
God reveals Himself to men through His wonderful works, that 
He alone could accomplish, and also through His miracles; and 
later on. He shows us His beloved Son, and bids us hear Him. 
This is the second signpost, and we must follow its indication, and 
turn neither to the right nor to the left, for neither Judaism nor 
any sect that denies our Lord’s Divinity is the true faith. Further 
on we find a third signpost, on which Christ has written in large 
and legible letters : “He that heareth you, heareth me” ; and “Thou 
art Peter, the Rock, and upon this rock I will build my Church.” 
Thus wherever Peter is and his successor, the Pope, and wherever 
there are bishops who have succeeded the Apostles, there is the 
true Church ; any path that diverges from it will lead us astray. 

God has given us these indications, and we cannot say that 
He has failed to make them clear. But nevertheless He has done 
more, and has bestowed upon us sacred records and an infallible 
teaching authority, and for thirty-three years He dwelt among us, 
teaching us the right way, the true religion, both by word and ex- 
ample. In His childhood He taught children, in His youth He 
taught the young, and on the Cross He died for His religion. He 
could have done no more, nor could He have shown us more 


22 


RELIGION— FA1TH--THE CHURCH 


IV. The Meaning and Possibility of Revelation 

Supposing a schoolboy set to work to do his sums, entirely ignor- 
ing all the rules of arithmetic, and maintaining that it did not matter 
whether twice two were four or five, we should all think him very 
stupid. If a child pretended to love its father, but at the same 
time fancied itself free to disregard that father’s wishes, we should 
declare that child both naughty and foolish. Now every one who 
says: 'T believe in God, but it does not matter which religion I 
adopt, behaves just like the child and the schoolboy of whom I 
have spoken. Religion is the connecting link between God and 
man, and as there is only one God, so there can be but one true 
religion. This ring of priceless worth, as Lessing calls it, can 
easily be proved genuine, for God Himself has revealed its 
authenticity most clearly. 

What then is this religion? Theoretically two things are pos- 
sible. A child knows by instinct its duty towards its father ; but the 
father may also explicitly exact respect from the child. In the 
same way, by means of intellect alone man knows that he is bound 
to love and honor God ; but God may also explicitly require of him 
this love and homage, and may further make known to him things 
which he could not find out for himself, nor learn from other men. 
Now God has dealt thus with us, and the religion that He has re- 
vealed is the one true religion. We have to consider to day the 
nature and possibility of revelation. 

I. St. Paul tells us that God inhabiteth light inaccessible, whom 
no man hath seen nor can see (i Tim., vi, i6), but nevertheless He 
reveals Himself to us, when He comes forth and makes us realise 


THE MEANING AND POSSIBILITY OF REVELATION 23 

His presence. He does this first through His creatures; the sun, 
moon and stars, the rain and sunshine, all the beautiful things that 
He has made, the life of individuals and the destiny of nations, all 
that takes place on earth and the voice of conscience — all these 
are revelations of God, and it is of them that the Apostle says: 
“The invisible things of God, from the creation of the vrorld, are 
clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made; His 
eternal power also and divinity’" (Rom., i, 10). As a rule, how- 
ever, we apply the word “revelation” less to things created than to 
another method whereby God makes Himself known. In Paradise 
He spoke to Adam bidding him not eat of the tree of knowledge 
of good and evil, and after the fall He said to him: “In the 
sweat of thy face thou shalt eat bread”, and again to the serpent: 
“I will put enmities between thee and the woman, and thy seed 
and her seed; she shall crush thy head, and thou shalt lie in wait 
for her heel”. 

To Abraham He promised to make him the ancestor of a great 
nation, and said : “I will bless thee and multiply thy seed . . . and 
in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed.” To 
Moses He spoke from the burning bush, bidding him lead the 
Israelites out of Egypt. God promised to establish for ever the 
throne of David’s descendant. There are many other passages 
in the Old Testament in which we read that God spoke directly 
to men, not merely indirectly through creatures. Sometimes He 
used human language, sometimes signs, sometimes dreams, some- 
times interior illumination, but always He spoke directly, and the 
truths revealed were partly such as men could already know, but 
partly related to things of which they could have no knowledge at 
all, for instance the coming of a future Redeemer. God’s revelation 
in the Old Testament consisted of instructions, commandments, 


24 RELIGION— FAITH— THE CHURCH 

threats and promises, but it was His will to reveal Himself more 
fully than by means of words and signs, and so one of the Divine 
Persons, the eternal, uncreated Word, assumed our nature and 
came down to earth to teach us. In the crib He spoke, though His 
language was inarticulate, to the shepherds and the wise men ; later 
on He addressed the doctors in the Temple, the multitudes on the 
mountains, and His disciples in the stillness of the country. Every- 
where He taught men the mysteries of the kingdom of Heaven, 
disclosing to them the fullness of the Godhead, whilst He dwelt 
among them as a man, as a brother among brethren, as a friend 
among friends. Do not overlook the fact that our Lord 
and Saviour could not possibly be satisfied with merely 
instructing us, for instruction alone would have availed 
nothing. In addition to the revelation made to us. He gives us 
grace to raise our mind and will, and our whole nature and being 
to His own Divine order, thus enabling us to attain to the lofty, 
supernatural goal that God sets before us. Christ founded His 
Church and made her the guardian of the Sacraments, in order 
thereby to give us His grace and reveal to us His truth. This is 
the second stage of revelation, and it leads up to the third and last, 
which we shall not enjoy in this life, but in the world to come, 
where we shall see God face to face, as He really is. This will be 
the climax and completion of the Divine revelation, the height of 
Divine wisdom, and our final end. This is the revelation of which 
St. Paul says that eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither hath it 
entered into the heart of man (i Cor., ii, 19). We cannot under- 
stand this, my brethren, and stand lost in amazement before it ; yet 
this is revelation ; — an elaborate system designed for man’s salvation, 
consisting of a gradual method of instruction, begun in Paradise 
and culminating in the Beatific Vision, and it is organized by God 


THE MEANING AND POSSIBILITY OF REVELATION 25 


Himself, and not effected merely through creatures and the forces 
of nature. 

2. But is this within the limits of possibility? We must be 
clear on this point. It is impossible for us of ourselves to attain 
to such knowledge, nor can any other creature, however exalted, 
impart it to us ; nor was God in any way bound to give us such a 
revelation; it is in fact called supernatural for this very reason. 
But is a revelation possible? Rationalists who reject all revelation 
and rely solely on the human intelligence, say that Divine revelation 
is utterly impossible; but we know that it not only is possible, 
but actual. Supernatural revelation is indeed possible, and the 
Vatican Council declared that whoever denied this fact, was no 
longer a Christian. Why should it be impossible? God created 
our ears, that we might hear the voices of others, and why should 
He not speak to us Himself? He fashioned our tongues, with 
which we instruct others, and why should He be unable to com- 
municate with us? Even when we talk with our fellow-men, who 
is it who really comes into closest contact with our minds? Men’s 
words are but waves of sound, that strike our ears, it is really God 
who instructs us, and why should He not be able to speak to us 
without having recourse to human language? Why should He not 
have means of proving with absolute certainty, that it is He and 
none other whose voice we hear? — Or is perhaps man’s intelligence 
incapable of learning from God? Is it so poor and wretched as 
never to be taught anything by Him ? It certainly possesses an ir- 
resistible craving for truth, and in the sphere of nature acknowl- 
edges no limitations. The Rationalists admit that this is the case, 
and argue that as nothing is beyond the scope of the human intel- 
lect, there is no need for a Divine illumination. Their argument 
is foolish, and they might as well say that, as nothing is beyond 


26 


RELIGION— FAITH— THE CHURCH 


the scope of the human intellect, there is no need for any education 
imparted by man. If this were so, we should not be greatly su- 
perior to beasts. Surely God must have it in His power to in- 
struct us more rapidly and more convincingly regarding the things 
which are too high for us, now that we are entangled with earthly 
affairs, yet which it is of the utmost importance for us to know, 
since they concern God Himself and our eternal salvation. Let 
no one maintain that to receive instruction of this sort is derogatory 
to human intelligence. At that rate it would be contrary to the 
nature of a wild rose, and derogatory to it, should another rose be 
grafted on to it, to improve its blossoms. It would be derogatory 
to a child and contrary to his nature, should his mother teach him 
facts that he did not already know. What God does, can never 
be contrary to human nature; it can only add dignity to the same. 
Even in the sphere of nature this is true, but it is still more true in 
the supernatural. It is false to say that human reason has no 
limitations, although it may have none in matters that fall within 
the scope of natural wisdom. We are certain that a God of in- 
finite power and wisdom exists, and therefore there must be a Divine 
truth beyond our natural powers to attain. It is not possible to 
recognize the whole life of the Godhead in His creatures, for there 
are mysteries that we cannot fathom, such as the Trinity in unity, 
the Incarnation and the marvellous presence of the incarnate Son 
of God in His Sacrament. These are the profound mysteries 
of the Godhead, which none save the spirit of God can 
penetrate ; these constitute the mystical life of which our 
Saviour said that none could know it except the Father and the 
Son and those to whom the Son would reveal it. Once 
a created spirit, the most exalted that ever came into being, 
presumed to search out these mysteries by his own strength; 


THE MEANING AND POSSIBILITY OF REVELATION 27 


he desired to be as God, and in that very moment he 
ceased to be an angel of light. We cannot of ourselves 
fathom these wonderful truths, but God has revealed them to us. 
The lowly shepherds and faithful wise men were privileged to see 
the Holy Child, whilst Herod and the Pharisees in their pride and 
arrogance failed to find Him. If only we are humble, it will not 
be hard for us to believe in a Divine revelation, and in all that it 
contains, and thus we shall be true Christians. 


RELIGION--FAITH--THE CHURCH 


a8 


V. The Advantage and Necessity of Revelation 

“The chief steward tasted the water made wine.” These words 
occur in the story of the marriage in Cana of Galilee. We can pic- 
ture the steward’s astonishment, and fancy that we hear him ex- 
claim: “What has happened? I know the taste of water and of 
wine, and what I have just drunk is undoubtedly wine.” My 
Brethren, what man can find out for himself and what he is taught 
by God, stand in the same relation to one another as water and 
wine. In our astonishment we ask whether God has really spoken 
to us, whether He is able to give us this wine. But He has indeed 
done so; as the Apostle says: “God who at sundry times and in 
divers manners spoke in times past to the fathers by the prophets ; 
last of all in these days hath spoken to us by His Son” (Hebr., i, 
I, 2). But here arises another question. We can perceive many 
wonderful things for ourselves by the light of reason; why then 
did God Himself instruct us? and was there any need for such a 
revelation? We cannot suppose that at the marriage feast either 
the chief steward or anyone else asked why they should have wine, 
since they could quench their thirst with water. No doubt they all 
looked gratefully at our Saviour, who had been so kind as to supply 
them with wine, and they accepted His gift with thankful hearts. 
This is how we ought to receive Divine Revelation. There are two 
kinds of truths : those that we can discover for ourselves and those 
that are too profound for us, being mysteries hidden in the God- 
head. God has gi^ren us instruction regarding both kinds — was this 
necessary ? 

I. God loves man with a peculiar love, desiring to be his Father 
and not merely his Creator. He wished to communicate to man 


THE ADVANTAGE AND NECESSITY OF REVELATION ^ 

His own life and Divine nature, although this cannot be accom- 
plished perfectly in this world. “We are now the sons of God, and 
it hath not yet appeared what we shall be. We know that, when 
He shall appear, we shall be like to Him, because we shall see Him 
as He is” (i John, iii, 2) ; as He is; i. e., no longer “through a 
glass,” but face to face, no longer “in part,” but fully, even as we 
are known; and our hearts will delight in the possession of God, 
whereas now no eye hath seen and no ear hath heard the good 
things that He has in reserve for us. Our joy will be complete in 
Heaven, and our present life only faintly represents the life that is 
to come. Even here we require to share in the supernatural and 
Divine gifts which we shall possess fully in the next world; we 
need, as it were, a foretaste of their joys, that we may cooperate 
in securing complete possession of them, for we are already chil- 
dren of God. One thing, therefore, is clear; unless God made 
known to us the supernatural goal for which He destined us, and 
unless He revealed Himself by emerging from the darkness that 
veils Him from our sight, we could not have any conception of the 
glories awaiting us ; therefore a revelation was indispensable. God 
must inevitably show us, as far as we are able to comprehend them, 
the good things that He has prepared for us. As human beings we 
did not require to know His secrets, but as children of God we 
could not dispense with this knowledge, and surely we all desire 
to be His children; He Himself wishes to be our Father. How 
great is our dignity and happiness! It doth not yet appear what 
we shall be; our sight is still too dim for us to behold the glory 
that awaits us, and there are mysteries which we must accept with 
faith and gratitude. Picture to yourselves a man bom blind, whom 
I invite to take a walk with me in the springtime. I am delighted 
with all that I see, but he perceives nothing, until, wishing him to 


30 


RELIGION— FAITH— THE CHURCH 


share my rapture, I say to him : *'Do you not notice the fragrance 
about us? It proceeds from countless blossoms that have just 
opened, and stand decked in exquisite colors. The dewdrops are 
flashing and glittering on the wet grass, and the sun’s rays are 
lighting up the firmament and illuminating the ripples of the brook 
that flows at the foot of the trees. Do you not hear the lark, pour- 
ing forth his song as he rises higher and higher, until he is lost in 
the blue vault of heaven?” Perhaps the blind man will grieve at 
not being able to see all these beauties, but, nevertheless, his face 
lights up and he thanks me for describing them to him. How in- 
finitely greater would be his delight if I could add: ‘^Be patient a 
little longer; the veil will be withdrawn and with your own eyes 
you will see all these things.” We are blind men, whom God leads 
by the hand, in His Fatherly goodness describing the beauties of the 
world to come, which is still hidden from us. He shows us, as far 
as we can understand, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost; 
He explains how it is His wish to raise us too to His Divine Life, 
and to make us share the grace and glory of His nature; He tells 
us how, after we had marred His beautiful handywork. His own 
Son became Man in order to redeem us ; He was a Child, even our 
Brother; He taught us and shed His Blood for us on the Cross; and 
this precious Blood still is outpoured in the Sacraments, and God 
the Son made Man still lives and works in His Holy Church. God 
shows us all this, but we are too blind to see it clearly ; nevertheless 
we should rejoice, especially as our Divine Guide assures us that 
the veil will soon fall from our eyes, after which the light of 
Heaven will shine, and in this light we shall behold all the glories 
of God. What now we believe, will then be clear to our sight, and 
we may well be thankful it is so. 

2. There is another class of truths, which our natural faculties 


THE ADVANTAGE AND NECESSITY OF REVELATION 31 


enable us to understand. Even the fall has not debarred man from 
perceiving clearly that there is but one God, the Creator of all 
things, and that the human soul is something spiritual that will out- 
live the body. Our unaided intelligence perceives these truths, 
which are stated explicitly in the Old and New Testaments. If we 
could ascertain them for ourselves, was it necessary for them to be 
thus stated? Yes and no — no, because we could have found them 
out for ourselves ; yes, because, as a matter of fact, they were not 
fully recognized, and there is a wide difference between the ability 
to perceive anything and actual perception of it. These truths are 
not such as we can see with our eyes or hear with our ears, and it 
is not every man who is capable of desirous thought, or who has 
time for it, since many are occupied in earning their daily bread, 
and many others, as St. Thomas remarks, have neither any desire 
nor the necessary industry to investigate such matters. Yet be- 
cause our salvation depends upon these truths, they ought to be 
known by all men, even by the poor and ignorant. It might take 
a long time to find them out independently, and our knowledge of 
them would be uncertain and probably not free from error, if they 
were not revealed in Holy Scripture. St. Paul tells us that “the 
invisible things of God are clearly seen, being understood by the 
things that are made” (Rom., i, 20). This is undoubtedly true, but 
he adds: “Men became vain in their thoughts, and their foolish 
heart was darkened . . . and they changed the glory of the incor- 
ruptible God into the likeness of a man, and of birds and of four- 
footed beasts.” That is to say, the whole human race fell into 
idolatry, and only one nation clung to the belief in the true God, 
and yet He spared no pains with this nation. Among the pagans 
some few had a dim idea of these truths. The Roman philosopher 
Cicero was acquainted with the writings of those who had discussed 


32 


RELIGION--FAITH-THE CHURCH 


this subject, and gave it as his opinion that most of them believed 
in the gods, but that they contradicted one another so much that no 
one could enumerate all the theories regarding the nature of God. 
There is nothing, he adds, too foolish for some philosopher or other 
to have maintained it. What did they teach about the human 
soul? Some supposed it to be made of air, others of fire; some 
considered it immortal, others thought that it perished with the 
body, and only a god could decide who was in the right. Such was 
Cicero’s view ; and we see to what depths the intellect of man can 
sink. Even the best of these philosophers knew nothing about 
duties, and from whom could they learn them? From their gods, 
who amidst their feasts find no leisure to trouble about mankind, 
unless indeed they arbitrarily make sport of human destinies, play- 
ing with them as we do with a ball? No; from such gods every 
imaginable vice, but no virtue, could be learned. There was a god 
of wealth, but not poverty; a goddess of lust, but not of purity or 
self-discipline. We cannot therefore wonder at the corruption 
prevalent among the pagans, nor at the evils of slavery, the degra- 
dation of woman, and the existence of sins of which St. Paul says 
that they ought not to be named among Christians. Self-interest, 
greed and cruelty prevailed to such an extent that the Apostle does 
not hesitate to describe the world in his day as devoid of all natural 
affection and pity. Such was paganism, the state to which men 
had fallen when left to themselves, without any Divine Revelation. 
How astonished Plato, Aristotle, Cicero or any other of the ancient 
philosophers would be, were they now to revisit the world ! What 
would be their surprise were they to hear the little children in our 
schools speak of God and the human soul, and were they to listen 
to an instruction on ‘‘Blessed are the merciful,” which, after all, is 
only one point of Christian doctrine ! With what veneration would 


THE ADVANTAGE AND NECESSITY OF REVELATION 33 


they regard the little book containing all this revelation! If they 
asked us whence we know all these truths at once so attractive and 
so exalted, we should surely be filled with holy joy and pride at 
being able to answer : *'God Himself revealed them, and His only- 
begotten Son Jesus Christ taught them to us.” 

It seems almost incredible that ‘*man, when he was in honor, did 
not understand” (Ps., xlviii, 13), and yet at the present day there 
are some who would fain be pagans, although they live in the midst 
of those who have received the Christian revelation. They admire 
Buddhism, and long for it as the religion of the future; they even 
wish to go as pilgrims to the Dalai-Lama. They may as well spare 
themselves the trouble; there may be some truths in Buddha’s 
teaching on the subject of the unimportance of earthly things, and 
the conquest of pain; but Christianity teaches it far better. Let 
us turn a deaf ear to all the absurdities of pessimism and nihilism, 
and determine to remain Christians. Others attempt apparently to 
revive the religion of our forefathers, and the worship of Woden 
and Thor and other fabulous deities. Surely none but fools 
would throw away a splendid gift, and voluntarily return to the 
state of destitution from which a benefactor has sought to raise 
them; none but fools would deliberately try to relapse into an 
illness from which they have been cured. Are not Christians, who 
reject Christianity in order to fall back into the errors of their 
pagan ancestors, acting with incredible folly? Let us be proud to 
call ourselves Christians and be true to our faith until death 1 

After all, what has modem paganism to offer? What can the 
intelligence of man accomplish when deprived of the support of 
Divine Revelation? Who are the people who extol paganism and 
despise Christianity? Their works may display eloquent language 
and brilliant style, but they contain little truth, although they can- 


32 RELIGION--FAITH-THE CHURCH 

this subject, and gave it as his opinion that most of them believed 
in the gods, but that they contradicted one another so much that no 
one could enumerate all the theories regarding the nature of God. 
There is nothing, he adds, too foolish for some philosopher or other 
to have maintained it. What did they teach about the human 
soul? Some supposed it to be made of air, others of fire; some 
considered it immortal, others thought that it perished with the 
body, and only a god could decide who was in the right. Such was 
Cicero’s view ; and we see to what depths the intellect of man can 
sink. Even the best of these philosophers knew nothing about 
duties, and from whom could they learn them? From their gods, 
who amidst their feasts find no leisure to trouble about mankind, 
unless indeed they arbitrarily make sport of human destinies, play- 
ing with them as we do with a ball? No; from such gods every 
imaginable vice, but no virtue, could be learned. There was a god 
of wealth, but not poverty; a goddess of lust, but not of purity or 
self-discipline. We cannot therefore wonder at the corruption 
prevalent among the pagans, nor at the evils of slavery, the degra- 
dation of woman, and the existence of sins of which St. Paul says 
that they ought not to be named among Christians. Self-interest, 
greed and cruelty prevailed to such an extent that the Apostle does 
not hesitate to describe the world in his day as devoid of all natural 
affection and pity. Such was paganism, the state to which men 
had fallen when left to themselves, without any Divine Revelation. 
How astonished Plato, Aristotle, Cicero or any other of the ancient 
philosophers would be, were they now to revisit the world ! What 
would be their surprise were they to hear the little children in our 
schools speak of God and the human soul, and were they to listen 
to an instruction on ‘‘Blessed are the merciful,” which, after all, is 
only one point of Christian doctrine ! With what veneration would 


THE ADVANTAGE AND NECESSITY OF REVELATION 33 


they regard the little book containing all this revelation! If they 
asked us whence we know all these truths at once so attractive and 
so exalted, we should surely be filled with holy joy and pride at 
being able to answer : *‘God Himself revealed them, and His only- 
begotten Son Jesus Christ taught them to us.” 

It seems almost incredible that ‘*man, when he was in honor, did 
not understand” (Ps., xlviii, 13), and yet at the present day there 
are some who would fain be pagans, although they live in the midst 
of those who have received the Christian revelation. They admire 
Buddhism, and long for it as the religion of the future; they even 
wish to go as pilgrims to the Dalai-Lama. They may as well spare 
themselves the trouble; there may be some truths in Buddha's 
teaching on the subject of the unimportance of earthly things, and 
the conquest of pain; but Christianity teaches it far better. Let 
us turn a deaf ear to all the absurdities of pessimism and nihilism, 
and determine to remain Christians. Others attempt apparently to 
revive the religion of our forefathers, and the worship of Woden 
and Thor and other fabulous deities. Surely none but fools 
would throw away a splendid gift, and voluntarily return to the 
state of destitution from which a benefactor has sought to raise 
them; none but fools would deliberately try to relapse into an 
illness from which they have been cured. Are not Christians, who 
reject Christianity in order to fall back into the errors of their 
pagan ancestors, acting with incredible folly? Let us be proud to 
call ourselves Christians and be true to our faith until death ! 

After all, what has modem paganism to offer? What can the 
intelligence of man accomplish when deprived of the support of 
Divine Revelation? Who are the people who extol paganism and 
despise Christianity? Their works may display eloquent language 
and brilliant style, but they contain little tmth, although they can- 


34 


RELIGION— FAITH— THE CHURCH 


not altogether rid themselves of all traces of the light in which they 
live. Still, they evince doubt and uncertainty on the subject ot 
God, the origin of the world, the final aim of man and all the great 
questions about which we need certainty and clearness. Moreover, 
their moral eode is defective; they call it independent morality, 
and extol its beauty and excellence, but these qualities are un- 
doubtedly possessed by the Christian code, and are frequently only 
borrowed from it. Secular or independent morality contains much 
that is neither good nor beautiful, for instance its doctrines on free 
love, etc. ; and it is utterly unfeeling and merciless. Nietzsche was 
the most logical of all the teachers of this school, and nothing could 
be more merciless than his theories. He denied Qirist and Revela- 
tion, and resolutely closed his eyes to all that God has ever taught 
us ; he was more ruthless than any of the old pagan philosophers, — 
he would abolish all pity, and sweep aside the weak and poor, leav- 
ing them to be trampled down by the “blond beast,” who alone 
was to rule and revel in every form of self-indulgence. But God, 
too, is logical, and He shrouded Nietzsche’s mind in darkness and 
madness, until the wretched man died in an asylum. 

“We are now the sons of God, and it hath not yet appeared what 
we shall be. We know that, when He shall appear, we shall be like 
to Him, because we shall see Him as He is” (i John, iii, 2). Now 
we walk in Faith; but do we rejoice in our Faith? Are we thank- 
ful that He has spoken, even though it may not have been in itself 
an indispensable revelation, but, then, was it absolutely necessary 
that our Saviour should have changed water into wine at the mar- 
riage feast? Let us not be ungrateful. God desires us, too, to share 
the feast; He bids us sit at His table and partake of the priceless 
wine of His glory, and be filled with unspeakable joy. 

Let us thank Him for giving us a few drops of this Divine wine 


THE ADVANTAGE AND NECESSITY OF REVELATION 35 


even in this life — ^but we must not forget that Jesus and His 
Mother were invited to the feast at Cana; all depended upon their 
presence then, and we know that it is only where men cling in 
faith to Jesus, and love and honor His Mother — only, that is to say, 
in the Catholic Church, that God’s Revelation is preserved true and 
inviolate, — only in that Church is it given to the faithful, as the 
wine of Divine grace and truth. Amen. 


36 


RELIGION— FAITH— THE CHURCH 


VI. The Possibility of Miracles 

God has spoken to and instructed us dii^ectly Himself, and not 
merely indirectly through His creatures. Of course He does not 
speak to every individual, but He revealed Himself through the 
prophets and afterwards through His only-begotten Son, Jesus 
Christ. In order to save mankind from falling a prey to unbelief and 
despair God commissioned and inspired the prophets to reveal to 
the chosen people the divine law, and to announce the coming of a 
Redeemer. In the fulness of time Christ came and revealed more 
perfectly and completely the divine truth and the divine law. But, 
the unbeliever may ask, what proof is there that the prophets were 
really inspired and enabled to reveal the supernatural ? What guar- 
antee have we that our Lord and the prophets really made known 
the Word of God? We have, thank God, a guarantee that we 
cannot possibly question ; we have only to read the doctrines taught 
by Christ and the Apostles, and we shall at once recognize their 
beauty, dignity and simplicity; we shall realize that they throw 
light upon all the intricate problems of life, and fill us with zeal 
and enthusiasm for all that is good and noble, and, lastly, we 
shall perceive the glorious fruits of this teaching, fruits borne 
by individuals and by the whole human race. Many people have 
already pointed out that these considerations are enough to prove 
that the revelation made by Christ and the prophets has a Divine 
and not a human origin. Others, however, would not be satis- 
fied with this proof, and it is well that we have additional in- 
terior evidence of the truth of revelation. All men are bound 


THE POSSIBILITY OF MIRACLES 


37 


to believe God^s Word, but they must be able to recognize it as 
such with ease and certainty. Ar-e there any tokens by which it 
may be known? When an ambassador is sent from one king to 
another, he has to show his credentials, viz., the seal and signature 
of the sovereign whose envoy he is. Now the prophets, and still 
more our Lord Jesus Christ, have credentials bearing God’s seal 
and signature in writing so plain that its authenticity cannot be 
questioned. The chief of these credentials are miracles. What are 
miracles? Are miracles possible? How can they be recognized? 
What are they intended to prove? These are four most important 
questions, upon which all Christianity depends. They are essen- 
tially modem questions, for modern unbelief and modern science, 
as it is called, delight in answering them all negatively. We, how- 
ever answer them most emphatically in the affirmative. Let us con- 
sider the first two questions to-day, viz.: What are miracles? and. 
Are miracles possible ? 

I. What are miracles? Not long ago we read the story of the 
marriage in Cana, at which our Lady said to her Divine Son : “They 
have no wine.” Jesus, without rising from His seat, ordered the 
water-pots to be filled with water, and when this water was tasted, 
it proved to be wine. On another occasion a mighty storm arose, 
and the waves dashed over the ship, filling it with water and threat- 
ening to sink it. The disciples were experienced seamen, but they 
began to tremble and fear, until Christ arose and rebuked the wind 
and the waves, saying : “Peace, be still.” Again, sick people, suffer- 
ing from all kinds of diseases, were brought to Jesus, and He healed 
them. Dottors heal the sick at the present day, first diagnosing the 
disease and then prescribing a remedy ; days, weeks or even months 
may pass before the patient is cured, and he may never be cured 
at all, but Jesus acted otherwise. He said to a leper: “Be thou 


38 


RELIGION^FAITH—THE CHURCH 


made clean,” and he was cured at once. He said to a man who 
had been a cripple for 38 years : “Stand up,” and he stood up im- 
mediately. He touched the eyes of the blind, and they regained 
their sight. A ruler came to Him saying : “Lord, come down before 
that my son die.” Jesus did not accompany him, but said: “Go 
thy way, thy son liveth,” and at that very moment the fever left 
him. The little daughter of Jairus lay dead, when Jesus took her 
by the hand saying: “Damsel, arise,” and immediately she rose up 
and walked. A young man was being carried out to burial, but 
Jesus touched the bier and said : “Young man, I say to thee, arise,” 
and he that was dead sat up and began to speak. Jesus stood be- 
fore the grave where Lazarus lay buried, and many of the Jews 
were present. Martha, the dead man’s sister, said : “Lord, by this 
time he stinketh, for he hath, been dead four days,” but Jesus only 
cried with a loud voice: “Lazarus, come forth,” and he that had 
been dead came forth. You all know these stories, and many 
others like them, which we read in the Gospels. They are accounts 
of miracles, things that took place publicly, seen and heard by 
men, things affecting tangible objects, such as the limbs and bodies 
of human beings — in a word, things palpable to the senses, and yet 
beyond the powers of nature to effect, — such are miracles. I 
know that some people will say that everything is explicable either 
by suggestion or by hypnotism; miracles, they maintain, are as- 
sumed by believers to take place, and it is true that firm confidence 
and an uncritical attitude of submission to a superior force often 
effect cures; a sick man desires to recover his health, and is per- 
suaded that some particular person or remedy can help him; as 
soon as that person approaches or that remedy is applied, fresh life 
is imparted to his body. This, we are told, is all extremely simple 
and natural, but it is not quite so simple and natural as it appears to 


THE POSSIBILITY OF MIRACLES 


39 


be. The force of suggestion may be great, especially in the case of 
nervous, hysterical and imaginary diseases, when it may literally 
impart fresh life to a sickly body. But how could suggestion cure 
the man who had been a cripple for 38 years, or the ruler’s son, 
whom Christ declined to visit, or the deaf, the dumb and the blind ? 
Nor can our Lord’s miracles be explained as the result of hypnotism. 
You may hypnotize a blind man and tell him that he can see, and 
he may believe you, and think that his sight is restored, but when 
he comes out of his hypnotic trance, he is as blind as ever. Could 
either hypnotism or suggestion have raised to life the widow’s son, 
Jairus’ daughter, and Lazarus? No; it is admitted that suggestion 
can effect nothing in the case of real organic disturbances and 
physical defects. Miracles of healing do not, however, stand alone ; 
it is impossible to ascribe the changing of water into wine to sug- 
gestion, nor the calming of the storm on the lake. We are told 
that a great king on one occasion ordered the sea to be scourged, 
to alloy its fury. This might indeed be a sort of suggestion, but 
the scourging certainly did not diminish the tempest. 

No, we cannot account for miracles by saying that they are due to 
suggestion or hypnotism, to any human skill or power, to the in- 
fluence of any creature or to any natural force. God alone can work 
miracles, and He is present whenever a real miracle takes place. 
When Pharao’s magicians witnessed all the wonders wrought by 
Moses, they said : ‘This is the finger of God.” Nicodemus said to 
our Saviour : “No man can do these signs which thou dost, unless 
God be with him.” The men who were in the ship with our Lord, 
when He calmed the storm, asked: “What manner of man is this, 
for the winds and the sea obey Him ?” They were convinced that 
one who could perform such wonderful works was no mere man, 
hut God. God only works miracles; He works them through 


40 


RELIGION— FAITH— THE CHURCH 


men, but He is the real Agent, just as in the ordinary course of 
affairs. He works by means of the laws and forces that He has 
given to His creatures. When a miracle takes place, God intervenes 
directly, and accomplishes Himself what the forces of nature are 
powerless to effect. 

II. But are miracles possible? Strauss says that they are not, 
because they are contrary to the consciousness of the modern world. 
A strange and ridiculous reason! Rousseau, another infidel, spoke 
much more sensibly and honestly on this subject. In answer to the 
question: “Can God work miracles?” he said: “The mere question 
would be impious, if it were not so absurd. Whoever answers it in 
the negative does not deserve the honor of being punished ; he ought 
to be shut up as demented.” 

Why should miracles be impossible ? Why should God be unable 
to act directly, and independently of the laws and forces of nature? 
Some people tell us that this is quite impossible, and that the laws 
of nature never change. Bjornson, the Norwegian poet, after mak- 
ing a statement to this effect, added : “Were it otherwise, life would 
be intolerable.” Life would indeed be intolerable were the natural 
laws to depend upon the arbitrary fancy of Bjornson or any other 
human being, but, thank God! this is not the case. There can be 
nothing intolerable in the belief that they are dependent upon the 
almighty, all-wise and all-merciful God. A man who denies the 
existence of God, must of course reject the possibility of miracles, 
but, as the Psalmist declares, only the fool hath said in his heart: 
“There is no God.” God is almighty, and everything that is was 
made by Him, and the laws of nature are no exception to this rule. 
As we read in the Book of Wisdom (xi, 21) : “He has ordered all 
things in measure and number and weight.” Not only did God 
lay down the laws of nature, but He continues to act in and through 


THE POSSIBILITY OF MIRACLES 


41 


the forces of nature. The farmer scatters seed in his field, but 
God giveth the increase. Without God no star would occupy its 
place in the firmament, and no living thing would draw breath. 
He alone is omnipotent, and He created everything of His own 
free will, for He was under no constraint; nothing obliged Him 
to create the universe, He created it as and because He pleased. 
Has He ceased to be a free agent? Is He subject to the laws of 
nature? Surely not, since they are wholly dependent upon Him 
and were made by Him. Man, weak as he is, and subject as he is 
to these laws, has nevertheless some control over them, and can em- 
ploy electricity, fire and water as he wishes; why then should God 
have no power over the natural laws? The sun and moon attract 
the vast volume of water in the ocean and draw it upward, in 
defiance of the force of gravitation; why should not God influence 
His creatures and the forces governing them, and effect directly 
what, as a rule. He accomplishes by means of the natural laws? 
He created all things out of nothing, and they continue to exist 
as long as and because it is His will. Only a fool can deny that 
God possesses this power, the same sort of fool as says : ‘There is 
no God.” 

But, we are asked, is it seemly for God thus to interfere in the 
course of nature? We must not imagine that He changes His 
purpose — no, He is unchangeable, and from all eternity He has 
decreed what takes place in time. Nor must we think of God as 
working miracles arbitrarily, just to remind us of His presence 
or to show us what He can do. We know that He is infinitely wise, 
as well as infinitely powerful — all that He does, is wise, and when 
He does anything extraordinary, like a miracle. He must have 
most wise reasons for His actions. What are these reasons? Sup- 
pose a mother is sitting beside her child's sickbed ; the doctor says 


42 


RELIGION— FAITH— THE CHURCH 


that he must die, and in her sorrow she remembers that there is 
One above who loves her and the boy; she throws herself upon 
her knees and implores God to restore him to health, for she knows 
well that He can do it, and will grant her prayer, if it is for her 
good and that of her child. It it were in your power, my brethren, 
to cure him, would you not grant her request? Assuredly; but it 
is not in your power; God alone can give the boy back to his 
mother, and who can forbid Him to do so? He is good. He 
supplied wine to the poor people of Cana; He restored her son 
to the widow at Naim, and their brother to Mary and Martha. His 
miracles declare His goodness, but they do more. It is His will 
to speak to us in revelation, but how should He prove that He 
was the speaker? Miracles were necessary to attest His Word, to 
guarantee its truth — ^they are not only possible, they are an abso- 
lute necessity. 

Now, my brethren, you are in a position to understand who 
deny the possibility of miracles. They are the enemies of revealed 
truth, men who refuse to believe what God has said, and to do 
what He has commanded. Otherwise they would not object to 
miracles. No one quarrels with the statement that two and two 
make four, because it pledges us to nothing — ^but supposing it had 
some bearing upon our moral life, and that those who accepted it 
were bound to be humble, obedient and self -restrained, I am certain 
that in the course of a few months books and pamphlets would be 
written to prove that it was by no means certain that two and two 
made four. Eventually some one would go so far as to deny the 
possibility of two and two making four. It is human nature ; men 
gladly accept what appeals to them, even if it is false, and reject 
what they dislike, however certain it may be. It is the case with 
religion, more than with anything else. My brethren, let us be 


THE POSSIBILITY OF MIRACLES 


43 


honest to ourselves and to God. We cannot possibly doubt that 
it is in His power to work miracles; common sense tells us that 
it must be so, and history records innumerable miracles that have 
actually taken place. They prove that what His messengers have 
taught, is the Word of God, and when we realize this fact, we shall 
behave like those who witnessed our Saviour’s miracles, and ex- 
claim with humble adoration : **Lord, we believe.” We believe the 
fundamental truth of Christianity, that our God is infinitely free 
and infinitely powerful, and therefore can work miracles, which 
none of His creatures can do. We believe this firmly, and we refuse 
to be led astray by any specious arguments. We are indeed liable 
to doubts concerning our faith, for we live in an atmosphere of 
doubt, and inhale it with the air that we breathe. Such doubts 
may be as the wind preceding a tempest, and they may threaten 
to destroy all our peace of mind; if so, we know what we have 
to do. When the waves dashed over the ship, the disciples cried : 
“Lord, help us, we perish” ; let us, too, appeal to Christ, and though 
He may seem to slumber. He is awake and, as the psalmist says: 
“He ruleth the power of the sea, and appeaseth the motion of the 
waves thereof.” He will arise and rebuke the storm, and there 
shall be a great calm. Amen. 


44 


RELIGION— FAITH^THE CHURCH 


VII. Demonstrability of Miracles, and the Force of Their 

Evidence 

God created the forces of nature and imposed certain laws upon 
them, and He continues to act through His creatures, and does not, 
having once created them, leave them to go their own way. He is 
a free agent, and as He creates everything of His own free will, 
when and as He pleases. He reserves to Himself the right of act- 
ing from time to time independently of the laws that He has made, 
and of accomplishing things that the forces of nature are powerless 
to effect; in other words. He can work miracles. Miracles, there- 
fore, are possible, and are not contrary to the nature of creatures 
but superior to it. Nor are they opposed to that of God, who 
works them without Himself undergoing any change, because from 
all eternity they formed part of His design, and He, the all-wise, 
perceives adequate reasons for them. Sometimes they are intended 
to give us a special proof of His love, as when the widow’s son was 
raised to life at Naim, but more frequently they are wrought when 
He wishes to confirm His Divine Word, that He has made known 
to us, by deeds no less Divine. We discussed this subject last time, 
and the facts are too obviously true for any doubt to be possible. 

We are asked occasionally how miracles may be recognized, and 
how we are to know what they are intended to reveal. Let us take 
these two points as our subject for to-day. 

I. How are we to recognize a miracle when it occurs? I re- 
ferred recently to certain acts performed by our Saviour, which 
Christians generally regard as miraculous. Let us consider one or 
two of them. First, let us picture our Lord standing with His 
Disciples and a number of Jews near the tomb of Lazarus, which 


DEMONSTRABILITY OF MIRACLES 


45 


was closed with a block of stone. When this was about to be re- 
moved, Martha remonstrated, saying: “Lord, by this time he 
stinketh, for he hath been dead four days.’^ Nevertheless Jesus 
cried: “Lazarus, come forth,” and the dead man arose. Now 
there is here no room at all for doubt; Lazarus was dead, and de- 
composition had set in, and yet he came forth alive out of the tomb. 
We may not know all the forces of nature, but it is certain that 
they could not effect this, and whatever wonderful discoveries are 
made in the future, no one imagines that it will ever be possible 
to discover a method of raising the dead. Death separates soul 
and body, and only He, who in the first instance united them to 
form a living man, can reunite them and restore a dead man to 
life. That is to say, God alone can raise the dead — and here we 
have a real test of a miracle, which is something so far beyond the 
forces of nature that God alone can accomplish it. Again, on an- 
other occasion Jesus saw a man who had been blind from his birth. 
Our Lord spat on the earth, mixed moisture and clay and 
smeared it on the blind man’s eyes, and after he had washed them 
he could see. Everyone was astonished ; some supposed that he was 
not the same man, but he asserted his identity. Then they took 
him to the Pharisees, who asked how he had recovered his sight, 
and he replied: “That man that is called Jesus made clay and 
anointed my eyes, and said to me : *Go to the pool of Siloe and 
wash.’ And I went and washed, and I see.” It was an undeniable 
fact that he could see, but those about him were not convinced 
that he was the man who had been blind, so they summoned his 
parents, and asked them, saying: “Is this your son, who you say 
was born blind?” The parents answered: “We know that this is 
our son, and that he was bom blind, but how he now seeth we know 
not . . . ask himself.’* They called the man again and solemnly 


RELIGION^FAITH—THE CHURCH 


46 

conjured him to speak the truth; but he repeated his assertion, 
'Whereas I was blind, now I see.” I think that if ever a fact was 
proved beyond all shadow of doubt, it is the restoration of this 
man’s sight, but how was it effected? Did earth and spittle ever 
give back sight? No, they would be more likely to destroy it. Was 
the recovery of his sight due to any natural means? No, the Jews 
perceived that well enough; they could not deny it, and so they 
cursed the man. His cure was undeniably miraculous. 

Renan, the infamous French infidel, thought that in order to prove 
the occurrence of a miracle it was necessary to appoint a commis- 
sion consisting of philosophers, men of science and historians. He 
proposed to have a corpse brought in so that every member of the 
commission could convince himself that life was extinct — then, if 
anyone came in and restored the dead to life, Renan professed him- 
self willing to believe in miracles, always provided that the experi- 
ment could be repeated as often as anyone desired; but, he added, 
the experiment will never succeed, therefore miracles are impos- 
sible. It seems as if Renan were presuming to dictate to God, for 
in the Gospels we read how a dead man was raised to life. Those 
who witnessed the raising of Lazarus were not, it is true, a com- 
mittee of philosophers and scientists, but they were intelligent peo- 
ple, possessing the senses of sight, hearing and smell. Renan main- 
tains that Christ enjoined silence upon those whom He cured, thus 
showing that He wished His miracles to remain secret, but the 
French writer overlooks the fact that people who do good, do not 
as a rule seek publicity, moreover our Lord’s miracles were not 
always hidden. Crowds in Jerusalem were, present when the man 
bom blind received his sight; all the inhabitants of Bethany gath- 
ered round the tomb of Lazarus, and on one occasion 4,000, on 
another 5,000 people were miraculously fed. Miracles were wrought 


DEMONSTRABILITY OF MIRACLES 


A7 


in the sight of Scribes and Pharisees, as well as before the Dis- 
ciples, and even our Lord’s enemies had to acknowledge that “this 
man doth many miracles” (John, xi, 47). These fact have never 
been denied, even by pagans like Celsus and Julian, although many 
have attempted to refer them to natural causes. It was impossible 
to deny the occurrence of our Lord’s miracles, because so many 
people witnessed them. Quadratus, a disciple of the Apostles, said 
to the Emperor Hadrian: “Our Saviour’s miracles stand any test, 
because they are genuine; I call to witness the persons whom He 
healed and raised from the dead, who outlived Him, and some of 
whom were still alive in our lifetime” (Euseb. Hist. eccl. 6, 3). 
Even those most ready to doubt could require no better evidence. 
It is therefore possible to prove the occurrence of miracles, and it 
has been done again and again. It may be difficult in the case of 
some events recorded in the history of the Church, as well as in 
that of some reputed miracles in our own day; the evidence in sup- 
port of them may be inadequate, or they may be due to natural 
causes, or there is some mistake or delusion about them. This is, 
however, not the point under discussion; we are considering mir- 
acles recorded in Holy Scripture, and their genuineness is tmde- 
niable. 

2. What is the good of miracles? What do they prove? We 
may be sure that, when God works a miracle, it is not simply for 
the sake of display. He intends to speak to us through the miracle. 
Of course He speaks to us through His creatures and through every 
event that takes place. He makes the sun rise and set; He causes 
seeds to grow, and gives us remedies to cure our diseases. All 
these things proclaim His power, wisdom and goodness, and, as St. 
Augustine says, they are all, in a sense, miracles, but they are of 
everyday occurrence, effected by the forces of nature, and we are 


^8 


RELIGION— FAITH— THE CHURCH 


apt to take such things as a matter of course and to pay no atten- 
tion to them, and therefore now and then God speaks in another 
way. He darkens the sun, when there is no natural reason for its 
eclipse. He multiplies bread instantaneously so as to feed multi- 
tudes, and by His Word He heals the sick and raises the dead. 
These are His own peculiar miracles, and through them He cries 
to us: 'T am the Lord, thy God.” Man hears this voice and in 
amazement responds: “My Lord and my God.” We are told 
further that the man bom blind, after receiving his sight, fell down 
and adored our Saviour. 

God loves us in a very special manner, as a father loves his chil- 
dren, and therefore He wishes to teach us what we ought to believe 
and do. He teaches us in ways adapted to our nature, through 
other men, through His envoys, the prophets, and chiefly through 
His Son, who became Man for this purpose. But what guarantee 
have we that they are sent by God? Here we see God's goodness. 
He gives us reason and does not require of us, as men are apt to do, 
blind belief, unsupported by any evidence, in the Divine mission of 
His ambassadors; no. He sends them to us provided with creden- 
tials, signed and sealed by Himself. Whilst they speak. He acts, 
bringing forward proofs, such as He alone can furnish, and work- 
ing miracles in support of their teaching. This is the principal 
reason for God's miracles; they prove that the doctrines taught by 
Christ and the prophets are Divine, and that the commandments 
laid down by them are the expression of God's will. Unless in our 
insolent blindness and obstinacy we deliberately defy God, these 
miracles constrain us to believe and obey Him. 

This is the view taken by God's messengers of the miracles that 
He works by their means. “Though you will not believe me,” says 
our Lord, “believe the works, that you may know and believe that 


DEMON STRABILITY OF MIRACLES 


49 


the Father is in me, and I in the Father.” “The works themselves, 
which the Father hath given me to perfect, they give testimony of 
me that the Father hath sent me” (John, x, 38; v, 36). When St. 
John’s disciples came to Christ asking whether He were the Mes- 
sias, who was to come, He replied : “Go and relate to John what 
you have seen and heard; the blind see, the lame walk, the lepers 
are cleansed, the deaf hear, the dead rise again” (Matt., xi, 3, 4). 
He changed the water into wine to manifest His glory; He raised 
Lazarus to make the people believe in Him ; and His own wonderful 
Resurrection ought to convince even the most obstinate of His Di- 
vine mission. Even the Pharisees regarded it in this light. When 
Christ raised the widow’s son at Naim, the evangelist tells us that 
the people all “glorified God, saying: great prophet is risen up 

among us, and God hath visited His people’” (Luke, vii, 16), 
When He healed the sick, “many believed in His Name, seeing His 
signs which He did” (John, ii, 23) ; and after the raising of Lazarus 
“many of the Jews who . . . had seen the things that Jesus did, 
believed in Him (John, xi, 45). Even the Pharisees and chief 
priests, after hearing the story, recognized its significance and in 
their impotent fury exclaimed: “What do we, for this man doth 
many miracles? if we let him alone, all will believe in him” (ibid, 
xi, 47, 48). 

Miracles are worked by God in corroboration of His prophets’ 
utterances, proving beyond all possibility of doubt that these utter- 
ances are God’s words; otherwise He would be deceiving us, and 
how can He, who is infinitely true and holy, deceive His people? 
The proofs that He gives are intelligible and effectual — even the 
ignorant must understand them, and the learned must acknowledge 
their force. Moreover, they retain their validity forever. Although 
God still works miracles, yet He does so more seldom than of yore. 


so RELIGION— FAITH— THE CHURCH 

St. Gregory tells us very beautifully that the infant Church required 
them, just as a newly planted tree requires to be watered. But the 
Gospel miracles still hold good, and will do so forever, for they are 
Divine evidence in support of God’s truth. We possess indeed an 
abundance of proofs, one alone would have sufficed to assure us 
of the Divine character of the doctrine preached by our Lord and 
the prophets. We are surrounded by a cloud of witnesses. In the 
Old Testament we read how God opened the flood-gates of heaven, 
covering the dry land with water, how He caused torrents of fire 
and brimstone to fall, how He overwhelmed the enemies of His 
people, how He appeared to Moses in the burning bush, how He 
led the Israelites across the Red Sea and gave them a pillar of cloud 
and fire to guide them, and how He fed them with manna and 
brought them to the Promised Land. I cannot attempt to enumerate 
all the miracles in the New Testament — the angel’s song at Beth- 
lehem, the star that guided the wise men, the changing of the water 
into wine, the feeding of multitudes with a few loaves, the won- 
derful cures, the casting out of devils, the raising of the dead. Our 
Saviour seems to have worked miracles lavishly during His life, 
and after His death the Resurrection was the greatest and most 
glorious of all His miracles. We must acknowledge that God’s 
envoys possess credentials such as no other ambassadors can show, 
and that His doctrine is supported by incontestable evidence. Surely 
He has left nothing undone in order to convince us, and we, who 
believe in Him, cannot possibly waver in our faith. A mediaeval 
theologian made a remark that is quite true, though it sounds blas- 
phemous, he said: ‘Tf we are mistaken in relying upon God’s 
Word, we shall be able to appear before Him and accuse Him of 
having led us into error.” But, thank God, we are not mistaken ; 
God cannot deceive us, and therefore we cannot go astray, and we 


DEMONSTRABILITY OF MIRACLES 


SI 

may proudly and confidently exclaim with St. Paul : “I know whom 
I have believed.” 

God is certainly not to blame for the unbelief prevalent among 
men ; He has spoken plainly enough, and has proved most convinc- 
ingly the truth of His Words, but men refuse to believe Him. If 
a man wilfully shuts his eyes, and declares that the sun does not 
exist, he refuses to see it, though it is shining brightly in the sky. 
Even among us faith is often very weak, so that it bears no fruit, 
but God is not to blame. Think of the sower in the Gospel; he 
sowed good seed abundantly, but some fell among thorns, some on 
rock soil, and some was eaten by the birds. So is it in our case; 
God’s Word is taught us, but our hearts are hard as a rock; we 
have time for pleasures and follies, but we do not care to listen to 
instruction, and our passions, especially our pride, tend 'to choke 
the good seed. Help us, O Lord, to amend our ways; grant that 
henceforth Thy seed may fall on good ground and grow and bring 
forth fruit! Amen. 


52 


RELIGION— FAITH— THE CHURCH 


VIII. Prophecies as Tokens of the Revelation 

The Prophets, among whom we number Christ, the greatest of 
them all, are God’s ambassadors, whom it is our duty to hear, since 
from their lips we learn God’s Word and law. God has endowed us 
with intelligence that demands reasons and proofs, and as He desires 
our religion and faith to be reasonable. He does not require us 
blindly to accept the message conveyed by His ambassadors, but 
allows us to examine their credentials. We have already begun to 
do this, for we have looked critically at the seal which these cre- 
dentials bear. It consists of the wonderful works which He alone 
can accomplish, such as calming storms, expelling evil spirits, healing 
those apparently incurable and raising the dead. The seal consists 
therefore of the miracles recorded in Holy Scripture, and we can 
question neither its authenticity nor its Divinity, and consequently 
the revelation on which this seal is set is also Divine. But this is not 
all. In the miracles God displayed His power as a guarantee of the 
truth of His Words. But He wished to give us a pledge of His 
Divine Wisdom also, and He did this by means of the prophecies 
of the Old and New Testaments, which He promulgated for and 
through His messengers. Miracles therefore are the seal attached 
to their credentials, and prophecies are, as it were, their Divine 
signature. If you will listen attentively, you will understand my 
meaning, and perceive that this signature is plain and legible, and 
that no one can forge it; hence it proves with certainty the truth 
and Divine character of the doctrine that bears it. 

I. Prophecies are statements regarding the future, which no one 
could foresee by natural means. Suppose a man has a good income. 


PROPHECIES AS TOKENS OF THE REVELATION 


53 


but lives beyond it, and does not work. I foretell that sooner or later 
he will be bankrupt, but this is not a prophecy on my part, for it is 
quite obvious and natural that, when his income is less than his ex- 
penditure, in course of time he will have nothing left. An astrono- 
mer watches the stars and a meteorologist makes observations. The 
one calculates the rising and setting of the planets according to cer- 
tain definite rules, whilst the other notices fluctuations in tem- 
perature and barometric pressure, atmospheric disturbances and air- 
currents. The astronomer can predict eclipses, the meteorologist 
issues warnings of approaching storms, but neither is a prophet, since 
their knowledge of the future is obtained by purely natural means. 
They know the causes producing the eclipse and the storm. Pyrrhus 
once made war upon Rome and sent to consult the oracle at Delphi 
regarding his prospects of success. The reply that he received was : 
“You are making war, victory is certain.’’ Was this a prophecy? 
When two armies are fairly equal, it is not easy to foretell which 
will gain the day, for much depends upon the skill of the generals 
and the personal courage of the men — things which cannot naturally 
be ascertained. Does this fact make the oracle’s answer prophetic? 
Let us see what happened: on hearing that victory was certain, 
Pyrrhus advanced against Beneventum, and sustained a crushing 
defeat. Victory was indeed certain, but it was on the Roman side. 
The Pythia had not deceived Pyrrhus, but she spoke in general terms 
and ambiguously, and really foretold nothing but what was self- 
evident. Any one can do this, without being a prophet. In places 
where people are very superstitious, we often hear of fortune-telling, 
and old women who profess to read men’s destiny from packs of 
cards. I need hardly point out to you how foolish it is to believe 
predictions explicable on purely natural lines ; they are certainly not 
prophetic. 


54 


RELIGION— FAITH— THE CHURCH 


But now let us look at the Old Testament. We read of a man 
named Nahum who, about 660 B.C., proclaimed that Ninive should 
be laid waste; some thirty years later Nabopolassar attacked and 
destroyed the city. A century earlier, Isaias stood before King 
Achaz and foretold a great wonder : ‘"Behold a Virgin shall conceive 
and bear a Son, and his Name shall be called Emmanuel” (Is., vii, 
14). This was to take place when the Sceptre had departed from 
Juda (cf. Gen., xlix, 10), but before the destruction of the second 
Temple, and this Emmanuel was to die in the seventieth week of 
years after the rebuilding of Jerusalem (Dan., ix, 24, etc.). Micheas 
foretold His birthplace, saying: “Thou, Bethlehem, art a little one 
. . . out of thee shall He come forth that is to be the Ruler in 
Israel” (Mich., v, 2). A star was to herald His coming, kings would 
bow down before Him, and the voice of one crying in the desert 
would proclaim Him. He was to work miracles, to be sold and be- 
trayed, to appear as a worm and no man, and to be led as a lamb to 
the slaughter. Gall and vinegar would be offered Him to drink. His 
hands and feet would be pierced and lots cast for His garments ; yet 
not one of His bones should be broken, nor should He see corrup- 
tion ; His sepulchre should be glorious. 

All this was foretold, and it all took place, yet no human being 
could of himself have foreseen it, nor were there any natural means 
of ascertaining it. Whence then did the prophets derive their in- 
formation? They tell us themselves, for over and over again recur 
such phrases as : “The Word of God came upon me,” “The Spirit 
of the Lord was on me,” “Lo, thus saith the Lord.” God Himself 
told them what they were to say; sometimes revealing it in a vision, 
sometimes by a mysterious voice or wonderful token, sometimes in- 
spiring them as they spoke. No matter how the information was 
conveyed, it came from God, and that is the essence of prophecy. 


PROPHECIES AS TOKENS OF THE REVELATION 55 


God speaks, God who knows the future, however distant and ob- 
scure, or rather, God to whom nothing is future, and from whose 
eyes nothing is hidden, for there is no sequence of events ; to Him 
all is present. From time to time it has pleased Him to raise a man 
up to His own height, to open his eyes, removing all his natural 
weakness of vision, so that he beholds, what otherwise no creature 
can see, and is bidden by the Spirit to reveal the same to his fellow- 
men. A prophet is one with whom God deals in this fashion. 

But there are two arguments raised against prophecies, and we 
must briefly consider them. The first is that the fulfilment of a 
prophecy may be due to chance. Let me quote Cicero to you on the 
subject of chance. He says that an animal may by chance trace the 
letter A with its snout on the sand, but it does not therefore follow 
that the same animal could write a drama like the Andromache of 
Ennises. The same thing may be said of prophecies; one or two 
might be fulfilled accidentally, but it is impossible that they should 
all be fulfilled in every detail. The other objection is that there may 
be some natural explanation of the whole matter, and reference is 
made to the phenomena of magnetism, spiritism, somnambulism and 
clairvoyance, as if these were of the same character. These phe- 
nomena are very strange, and are occasionally accompanied by re- 
markable powers of memory and increase of knowledge, but they do 
not in the least resemble the gift of prophecy. Those who have in- 
vestigated these phenomena tell us that, where no deception is pres- 
ent, much can be explained by stimulus supplied to the nerves and 
the imagination, but it is quite certain that no one who dabbles in 
the so-called black arts could foretell events so minutely as did the 
prophets of the Old Testament, and no medium could know with 
certainty what resolutions a person endowed with free will would 
form one day in advance, far less after a lapse of centuries. No 


56 


RELIGION— FAITH— THE CHURCH 


one can know this but God Himself, and the prophet to whom He 
chooses to reveal it. 

2. What kind of evidence do prophecies afford? They prove 
three things: firstly, that God is interested in us, and stands in a 
close and almost personal connection with us. Prophecies, regarded 
from this point of view, are seen to form part of His Divine provi- 
dence and of revelation. Secondly, they are sources of consolation 
and encouragement to those who hear them, especially in times of 
affliction. When the Israelites were surrounded by enemies, and 
were languishing as homeless exiles in captivity, God sent prophets 
to console them. In these sad gloomy times, may not we too, my 
Brethren, find comfort in our Lord’s assurance that the gates of hell 
shall not prevail against His Church ? 

Prophecies are uttered for a third reason, far higher than the pre- 
ceding. All collectively, both those already fulfilled and those still 
awaiting fulfilment, prove the truth and Divinity of revelation and 
of Christianity. They are, as we have seen, God’s signature, guar- 
anteeing the authenticity of His doctrine and Commandments. The 
prophets themselves looked upon them in this light: Isaias said to 
King Achaz : ‘'Ask thee a sign of the Lord thy God,” a token, that 
is to say, of the truth of my words. Achaz refused, and the prophet 
continued: “The Lord Himself shall give you a sign. Behold a 
Virgin shall conceive and bear a Son” (Is. vii, ii, 14). Our Divine 
Saviour, the chief of all the prophets, in foretelling His betrayal by 
Judas, said : “I tell you before it come to pass, that when it shall 
come to pass, you may believe that I am He” (John, xiii, 19). It is 
indeed a satisfactory proof. The prophets and Christ appeared 
preaching new doctrines, and as a guarantee of their Divine mission 
and the truth of their teaching, they revealed the innermost thoughts 
of men, thoughts of which these men were still unaware, and resolu- 


PROPHECIES AS TOKENS OF THE REVELATION 


57 


tions which they were liable to change at any moment. Who could 
enable the prophets to do this save God Himself, who thus satisfied 
their statements? No one could forge this signature: ‘Thus saith 
the Lord : ‘Who is like to Me ? let him call and declare . . . and the 
things to come and that shall be hereafter let him shew’ ” (Is., xliv, 
7). Since therefore God has signed and sealed the faith that we 
profess, it must be true and Divine. There is another point to con- 
sider: One single prophecy uttered by God would be enough to 
vouch for the truth of all revelation, but we possess hundreds of 
prophecies, many of which have been fulfilled under the new dis- 
pensation. We have overwhelming evidence that none can gainsay. 
If in some vast cathedral one taper were lighted, it would be visible, 
but it would not enable us to see much else. But when hundreds of 
lights blaze in every part of the building, the whole is plain to view, 
and we can see the arches, pillars and architectural details. The 
cathedral flooded with glorious light is a type of our Catholic Faith, 
illumined by prophecies. If any one studies them without prejudice, 
he will soon perceive how much light they cast even on the ap- 
parently obscure doctrines of our Holy Faith. We cannot look for 
more than partial enlightenment in this life, for St. Peter tells us 
that prophecies are now “a light that shineth in a dark place, until 
the day dawn, and the day star arise in your hearts” (2 Peter, i, 19), 
but nevertheless they are a real, radiant light. In writing to the 
Thessalonians St. Paul describes his preaching as a manifestation of 
power and of the Holy Spirit. The same may be said of all revela- 
tion and of Christianity as a whole, it is a manifestation of power 
and the Holy Spirit. Miracles show forth God’s power, and 
prophecies reveal His Spirit; the former are the seal, the latter the 
signature confirming His doctrine. Let us then accept God’s revela- 
tion with reverence, as being truly Divine. We must accept the 


58 


RELIGION— FAITH— THE CHURCH 


whole, not merely those points in it that appeal to us ; God, who is 
infinitely wise and true, cannot teach us what is false. We should 
rejoice in His revealed truth, for it sheds light on the dark paths of 
this life ; there is still need of Faith, but when the day star arises in 
our hearts, Faith will give place to sight, and to the fullness of joy 
forever and ever. Amen. 


PROPHECIES RELATING TO OUR LORD’S PASSION 59 


IX. Prophecies Relating to Our Lord^s Passion 

God is eternal, and His eye discerns all that is still hidden from 
us in the future, whilst it also searches the hearts of all His crea- 
tures. No man can know what God discovers there, unless by 
special revelation, such as is vouchsafed to His ambassadors, whose 
prophetic utterances Convey the knowledge to others. God does not 
speak in words only, but also in deeds, deeds which He alone per- 
forms and of which He determines the significance. These deeds 
we call types ; they are, as it were, pictures of what will eventually 
take place ; and prophecies and types go together, because both come 
from God, and together form the signature that He sets upon the 
credentials of His ambassadors. Both refer in an especial manner 
to the one great Ambassador, whose path was prepared by all the 
other prophets, namely, the Only-Begotten Son of God, our Lord 
and Saviour, whose lifework was our redemption. The Gospel 
tells us that towards the close of His life, our Lord hid Himself, 
and that is why the Church covers up His figure on the Crucifix for 
the last fortnight of Lent, although He ought to be continually in 
our thoughts at this time. In a somewhat similar fashion our 
Saviour’s figure is concealed in the prophecies and types of the Old 
Testament; let us consider it to-day as God revealed it to His 
people ages before our Lord’s coming. St. Bernard tells us that 
there are three points of which we ought not to lose sight in med- 
itating upon the Passion; viz.: What did Christ suffer? How did 
He suffer? Why did He suffer? The prophets will answer these 
questions. 

I. They tell us in great detail precisely what Christ was to suf- 
fer. All men were to conspire against Him. “Why have the Gen- 


60 


RELIGION— FAITH— THE CHURCH 


tiles raged, and the people devised vain things? The kings of the 
earth stood up, and the princes met together, against the Lord and 
against His Christ’" (Ps., ii, i, 2). But how could they hope to 
seize one who, whenever He chose, cast blindness upon them and 
vanished? They had recourse to treachery: “The man of my 
peace, in whom I trusted, who ate my bread, hath greatly sup- 
planted me” (Ps., xl, 10). “If he that hated me had spoken great 
things against me, I would perhaps have hidden myself from him; 
but thou, a man of one mind, my guide and my familiar, who didst 
take sweet meats together with me, in the house of God we walked 
with consent” (Ps., liii, 13-15). Thirty pieces of silver were 
weighed out to the traitor (Zach., xi, 12), and false witnesses came 
forward so that sentence was given against Him, and He was con- 
demned to a most shameful death. They pierced His Hands and 
Feet and numbered all His bones ; they parted His garments among 
them, and for His vesture they cast lots; they gave Him vinegar 
to drink, and at last He resembled a worm, and no man; He was 
the reproach of men and the outcast of the people ; all they that saw 
Him laughed Him to scorn, saying: “He hoped in the Lord, let 
Him deliver him” (Ps. xxi and Ixviii). At last He opens His 
mouth and cries : “O God, my God, look upon me ; why hast Thou 
forsaken me?” “And it shall come to pass in that day, saith the 
Lord God, that the sun shall go down at midday, and I will make 
the earth dark in the day of light” (Amos, viii, 9). You all know 
this story, but every detail was foretold by David and Isaias, the 
one over 1,000, and the other six or seven hundred years before 
our Lord’s birth. The Evangelists have recorded how their prophe- 
cies were fulfilled, and it is impossible to Suppose that He, of whom 
such wonderful things were predicted, was merely an ordinary 
human being; God Himself could hardly prove more clearly that 


PROPHECIES RELATING TO OUR LORD’S PASSION 61 ] 


the one who suffered such indignities was He of whom Isaias said 
that God Himself would come and save us (Is., xxxv, 4). 

2. God told us how our Redeemer would suffer, as well as the 
kind of His sufferings. Let us call to mind how Abraham and 
Isaac, the son of the promise, went to Mount Moria. God had 
called Abraham and said: “Take thy only-begotten son Isaac, 
whom thou lovest . . . and offer him for an holocaust upon one 
of the mountains which I will shew thee.” They set out without 
delay, Isaac carrying the wood for the holocaust, and Abraham 
bearing fire and a sword. Isaac asked where the victim was, and 
Abraham replied that God would provide Himself a victim for a 
holocaust. Having reached the place which God had shewn him, 
he built an altar and laid the wood in order upon it; and when he 
had bound Isaac, he laid him on the wood; then, putting forth his 
hand, he took the sword to sacrifice his son. But God did not de- 
sire the boy’s death and was satisfied with this proof of Abraham’s 
obedience. Isaac was, however, a type of another sacrifice, another 
son of the promise, and Moria was a type of Golgotha, as Isaac 
was of Christ. Our Lord bore His Cross just as Isaac had carried 
the wood, but there was no need for Him to ask where the victim 
was. He had already said : “A body Thou hast fitted to me, . . . 
behold, I come” (Hebr., x, 5, 7), and He clasped in His arms the 
Cross on which He was about to die. He went like a lamb to the 
slaughter, not opening His mouth, and when He came to the place, 
He allowed Himself to be nailed to the Cross without uttering a 
word of protest. This time the blow was really struck, and Christ, 
the second Isaac, was slain; He did not resist, but gave His Body 
to the strikers ; He turned not away His face from them that re- 
buked Him and spat upon Him. He was offered because it was 
His own will (Is., 1 and liii). 


RBLIGION--FAITH--THE CHURCH 


b2 


We cannot without emotion think of Isaac lying bound upon the 
altar of sacrifice, but surely our hearts should be touched still more 
when we think of Christ, the only-begotten Son of God, hanging 
on the Cross, willing and eager to be a sacrifice for our sins. 

3. Lastly, the prophets tell us why Christ was to suffer. In 
speaking of the Man of Sorrows, acquainted with infirmity, Isaias 
says: ‘‘Surely He hath borne our infirmities and carried our sor- 
rows. . . . He was wounded for our iniquities. He was bruised for 
our sins ; the chastisement of our peace was upon Him, and by His 
bruises we are healed. All we like sheep have gone astray, every 
one hath turned aside into his own way, and the Lord hath laid on 
him the iniquity of us all” (Is., liii, 4-6). Anyone reading these 
words must be reminded of the sin-offerings in the Levitical law, 
the victims on whom the priests laid the sins of the people. He will 
be reminded, too, of the Paschal lamb, whose blood was sprinkled 
on the doorposts of the Israelites, and of the brazen serpent in the 
wilderness. The people had murmured against God, and to punish 
them He sent serpents among them, which bit them and killed many. 
The Israelites in dismay came to Moses, saying: “We have sinned 
. . . pray that the Lord may take away these serpents from us.” 
And Moses prayed for the people, and the Lord said: “Make a 
brazen serpent and set it up for a sign; whosoever being struck, 
shall look on it, shall live.” Moses therefore made a brazen ser- 
pent, . . . which when they that were bitten looked upon, they 
were healed (Numbers xxi). The Israelites represent the human 
race ; the desert is the world ; ever since our first parents listened to 
the serpent in Paradise, the brood of noxious reptiles has been 
multiplying, and now they are all around us, watching for an 
opportunity to assail us and to set their poisonous fangs into our 
souls. There are serpents of pride, envy, hatred, intemperance, 


PROPHECIES RELATING TO OUR LORD’S PASSION (A 


impurity, doubt and despair. Who can heal a soul once wounded 
by any of these ? “As Moses lifted up the serpent in the desert, so 
must the Son of Man be lifted up” (John, iii, 14). He hung on 
the Cross, sinless though He was, and desired that the blood flow- 
ing from His wounds should heal us, but, just as the Israelites had 
to look at the brazen serpent, so must we look up at Christ with! 
faith and love. The Jews watched Him hanging on the Cross, but 
it did them no good, for they did not believe in Him. The penitent 
thief received forgiveness, for he had unbounded confidence in our 
Lord^s goodness and mercy. Our Saviour Himself promised, if He 
were lifted up from the earth, to draw all men to Him; may He 
draw us and give us pardon and the kiss of peace! This, my 
Brethren, is the meaning of the brazen serpent — it is a type of the 
mystery of the Cross, a type devised by God, long before the cruci- 
fixion. O Crux, ave! Christ Himself foretold the fulfillment of 
the prophecies of the Old Testament. For instance, before His last 
journey to Jerusalem He said to His Disciples: “Behold we go up 
to Jerusalem, and all things shall be accomplished which were writ- 
ten by the prophets concerning the Son of Man. For He shall be 
delivered to the Gentiles, and shall be mocked and scourged and 
spit upon, and after they have scourged Him, they will put Him to 
death; and the third day He shall rise again” (Luke, xviii, 31-33). 
Yes, our Lord foretold His Resurrection as well as His death, but 
even the darkest depths of His shame are lighted up by the Divine 
power and wisdom — the wisdom that so wonderfully foresaw all 
that would come to pass, and the power that fulfilled all predictions. 
Thus in Passiontide we see the Man of Sorrows with the glory of 
Heaven shining on Him. Let us think how much He suffered, 
and with what inexhaustible patience, remembering that it was all 
for us, for everyone of us, to make atonement for our sins and to 


64 


RELIGION— FAITH— THE CHURCH 


obtain for us strength to avoid sin in future. Listen to the voice 
of Holy Church, who reminds us how the prophecies and types 
of the Old Testament were fulfilled most perfectly during our 
Saviour’s passion. But the Church shows us another picture and 
a still sadder one, for it represents ourselves. The sinful, ungrate- 
ful city of Jerusalem is a type of 'js, and it is to us that the words 
are addressed: “Jerusalem, Jerusalem, O turn thee to the Lord 
thy God” — let us obey the call. Amen. 


CHRISTS RESURRECTION PROOF OF HIS DIVINE MISSION 65 


X. Christ's Resurrection the Proof of His Divine Mission 

We have seen how the credentials, given by God to His envoys, 
bear His divine seal and signature, consisting of miracles and proph- 
ecies. Let us return once more to the subject. Suppose that some 
one comes forward, professing to be divinely commissioned to teach. 
We ask for evidence in support of this statement, and in reply he 
says : ‘Thus saith the Lord," and proceeds to foretell things that no 
human being can possibly know, and what he foretells, actually 
occurs. We cannot doubt that he is really sent by God. Another, in 
proof of his divine commission, works miracles and does what God 
alone can do; again, we cannot refuse to recognize his credentials. 
God has sent many teachers and prophets into the world, but one 
ranks far above the rest, and the genuineness of his mission is at- 
tested by wonderful miracles and prophecies. This is Jesus Christ, 
through whom, as the apostle says, God spoke to us last, and whom 
His Heavenly Father presented to the world as His beloved Son. 
We have already discussed several of our Lord's marvellous works 
and the predictions that were fulfilled in Him, but one still remains 
for our consideration, and that one is the greatest of all miracles, 
the most glorious fulfillment of all prophecies, viz., the Resurrection. 
Strauss, an infidel, calls the Resurrection of Christ the heart of 
Christianity, and he is right. He is but reechoing St. Paul's words : 
“If Christ be not risen again, then is our preaching vain, and your 
faith is also vain" (1 Cor., xv, 14). Christ's resurrection is the 
central doctrine of the Christian faith, the most conclusive proof of 
His divine mission, of His divinity and of the divine origin of 
Christianity. Let us take the Resurrection as our subject for con- 
sideration to-day. 


66 


REUGION—FAITH^THE CHURCH 


I. On more than one occasion our Lord foretold it. When He 
had driven the money changers and traders from the Temple, the 
Jews were indignant and asked : *‘What sign dost thou shew unto us, 
seeing thou dost these things?” Jesus answered: “Destroy this 
Temple, and in three days I will raise it up.” The Jews misunder- 
stood Him, but the evangelist adds : “He spoke of the temple of His 
body” (John ii, 19 ). Another time some of the scribes and Phari- 
sees came to Him, saying: “Master, we would see a sign from Thee.” 
Jesus replied : “No sign shall be given to this generation but the sign 
of Jonas the Prophet. For as Jonas was in the whale's belly three 
days and three nights, so shall the Son of Man be in the heart of the 
earth three days and three nights” (Matt., xii, 38-40). Again 
when our Saviour and His Disciples were on the way to Jerusalem, 
He foretold in the greatest detail all the suffering that awaited Him, 
and said that on the third day He would rise again (Matt., xx, 19). 
Yes, He was to die and to be buried, but on the third day He was 
to rise again. Even the Jews were well aware of this prediction, 
for no sooner was He dead, that the chief priests and Pharisees 
went to ask Pilate to set a guard round the Sepulchre, giving as their 
reason the fact that Christ had said, whilst He was yet alive : “After 
three days I will rise again” (Matt., xxvii, 63). 

Now let us consider what would be the case if Christ had not risen 
again. He would have deceived Himself, and have attempted to 
mislead both His friends and enemies. He would have been a 
seducer, as the Jews called Him, and St. Paul was perfectly right in 
saying that his own preaching and our faith would have been vain ; 
in fact by this time Christianity would have disappeared. Christ’s 
followers were far too timid to come forward and preach His doc- 
trines, and no more would have been heard of His religion or of the 
Church that He promised to found. But now is Christ risen from 


CHRISTS RESURRECTION PROOF OF HIS DIVINE MISSION 67 


the dead, after suffering all that He had foretold, risen on the third 
day, as He predicted. Therefore what He said was true, since it 
actually took place. It is quite clear that God alone can foretell the 
resurrection of one who is dead, since God alone can effect such a 
resurrection, and consequently Christ was really sent by God, and 
the religion, that He taught, is divine. God Himself bore testimony 
to Him by means of the glorious fulfilment of the prophecies regard- 
ing the resurrection. “He is risen, as He said,’* were the words ad- 
dressed by the angel to the women at the Sepulchre; yes, He rose 
precisely as and when He had foretold. 

2. But did Chiist really rise again? No reasonable person denies 
that He was really dead, when His body was laid in the sepulchre. 
Some foolish theory has indeed been put forward, according to which 
He was only unconscious, the lance thrust relieved the pressure 
on His heart, and in the coolness of the tomb He gradually recovered 
consciousness. We need not linger over such a supposition; the 
evangelists all agree in saying that life was extinct, and the flow of 
blood and water following the withdrawal of the lance confirms their 
statement. Moreover the Roman soldiers were satisfied that death 
had taken place, and their centurion reported accordingly to Pilate. 
Yes, Christ had really died, but did He really rise again? The evi- 
dence in support of the resurrection is too strong to be overthrown. 
First we have the testimony of God’s angels, who had made known 
the mystery of our Saviour’s incarnation and birth, and who now 
were to testify to His resurrection. When the women came to the 
sepulchre, they stood amazed at finding it empty, and the angel said : 
“He is not here, for He is risen, as He said.” The women told 
the Disciples, and Mary Magdalene, who had seen her risen Lord, 
could tell more than the rest, but their report was not believed. On 
the way to pmmaus the two Disciples spc^se aJmost contemptuously 


68 


RELIGION— FAITH— THE CHURCH 


of the woman's story, evidently thinking them victims of their own 
imagination. Yet not long after Christ revealed Himself to these 
two Disciples and supped with them. He had already shown Him- 
self to Peter and John, then to the other Apostles, and lastly to 
Thomas, who was still unwilling to believe. To him He showed the 
marks of the wounds in His hands and side, and forced him to fall 
down and exclaim : “My Lord and my God." Afterwards He ap- 
peared to the Apostles at the Lake of Tiberias, and then to more 
than 500 Disciples at once. Our Saviour did not appear to one or 
two people, but to many ; not only to women but to men, men, too, 
who doubted Him and were hard to convince. During forty days 
He appeared frequently, sometimes in one place, sometimes in an- 
other ; in the open air and also when the doors were closed ; in broad 
daylight He ate and talked with His Disciples. Who can doubt that 
He really rose again ? Yet, that we may be more perfectly convinced, 
God has given us the testimony of His enemies as well as of His 
friends, and evidence supplied by enemies always carries weight. 
What do we learn from them? They were much annoyed at the 
fact that the soldiers appointed to guard the sepulchre had, in their 
alarm, rushed into the city, telling everyone what they had seen. If 
Christ were indeed risen again, the Pharisees' plan was completely 
frustrated, just at the moment when it seemed so successful. What 
were they to do? They would certainly have produced the dead 
body, had it been in their power to do so. At last the chief priests 
and ancients assembled to take counsel together, and decided to give 
a great sum of money to the soldiers, who were to say: “His Dis- 
ciples came by night and stele Him away when we were asleep” 
(Matt., xxviii, 12, 13). St. Augustine remarks sarcastically: 
“What is the good of bringing forward witnesses who were asleep? 
You yourselves must have been asleep, when you devised such an 


CHRISTS RESURRECTION PROOF OF HIS DIVINE MISSION 69 


excuse/’ Such is the testimony furnished by our Lord’s enemies and 
some still persist in denying that He rose again, suggesting all sorts 
of argiunents, none of which is worth discussion. We should in- 
deed refrain from arguing if a man were to come to us at noon, 
when the sun was high in the heavens, and were to tell us that it was 
not shining. We should shrug our shoulders and leave him alone, 
for it is quite useless to argue with such a person. I must, however, 
refer to one modem writer, who speaks of our Lord with affection 
and admiration, but is, nevertheless, His enemy, for he does not be- 
lieve in His divinity. Haraack distinguishes between the message 
and the faith of Easter. By the former he means the report of 
the empty sepulchre and of our Lord’s Resurrection and appear- 
ances to His Disciples. These Harnack would set aside as fictitious, 
but he wishes to retain the faith of Easter, i. e., our conviction of 
the spiritual victory won by Christ crucified. The German professor 
does not explain how we can keep one without the other, since there 
is abundant evidence in support of what he calls the Easter message, 
and it has always been believed by Christians, whose faith is based 
upon it. In the Apostles’ Creed stand the words: “He rose again 
from the dead”; without this foundation all our faith falls to the 
ground, and Hamack’s attempt to separate faith and facts is utterly 
futile. He may, like the chief priests of old, be accused of having 
put forward such a theory in his sleep. “If Christ be not risen, then 
is our preaching vain, and your faith is also vain.” Away with all 
half-hearted acceptance of the great fact of the Resurrection! 
Thank God, Christ is risen, and friends and foes alike bear witness 
to His Resurrection. 

In his Faust, Goethe represents a man who has lost all faith and 
all hope of anything good and beautiful, and who, in his despair and 
weariness of life is on the point of putting an end to his existence. 


70 


RELIGION— FAITH— THE CHURCH 


He is just raising the cup of poison to his lips when he hears the 
bells and the music in a neighboring church, for it is Easter Sunday. 
Faust listens, shakes his head and says : “I hear the message, but I 
have no faith.’* Then he remembers the indescribable happiness that 
he used to feel at Easter when he was young, and he exclaims : “Re- 
sound, ye heavenly strains; my tears no longer refused to flow; I 
belong again to this world.” 

My Brethren, as Christians we accept with unswerving faith the 
doctrine of the Resurrection, which we were taught in our childhood. 
Every Easter when the bells ring out, the words, “Alleluia, Christ is 
risen,” rise to our lips, and our hearts are filled with joy. Should 
not our faith inspire us with enthusiasm? Think how timid and 
cowardly the Apostles were before the Resurrection, but after Christ 
rose again they realized that He was indeed the Son of God, and 
that His teaching was divine. No longer did they hide behind closed 
doors, but went forth publicly, fearless of death and danger, preach- 
ing Christ crucified and, as they proudly added : “Christ risen again 
from the dead.” We, too, believe in the same Christ, who said of 
Himself : “I am the Resurrection and the life.” His Resurrection is 
to us a pledge that we shall rise again hereafter to life eternal ; but it 
should also stimulate us to rise again now from our sins. We have 
the faith, my brethren, let us rejoice and glory in it, and may it 
quicken our hearts to fresh life, and develop in them an increase of 
hope and charity. Amen. 


MIRACULOUS GROWTH OF CHRISTIANITY 


n 


XI. Miraculous Growth of Christianity 

This teaching is re-echoed through the pages of the New Testa- 
from God, who confirmed it, as we have seen, by prophecies and 
miracles. You may feel inclined to complain that it is so long since 
the prophecies were fulfilled and the miracles were wrought; you 
wish that you could have witnessed them yourselves. Yet, though 
we were not present, it is as certain as any historical fact can be, 
that Christ really gave sight to the blind, raised the dead to life, and 
Himself came forth in glory from the tomb. These facts are as cer- 
tain now as when they took place, and therefore they ought to con- 
vince us just as much as they convinced the Disciples who actually 
witnessed them. Still you feel that you would like to behold a 
miracle. Very well, you can do so, and you need not envy our Lord^s 
Disciples ; a very great miracle, I may even say the greatest of all 
miracles, is plain to view, viz., the Church, which Christ founded in 
order to impart to us the doctrine and grace that He brought from 
Heaven. This Church is, as it were, our Lord Himself, living on 
from age to age and extending His sway over all the world. This 
is His greatest miracle, and we, who are so fortunate as to belong to 
the Church, can daily and hourly appreciate its magnitude. The 
mere growth of Christianity is a miracle, a greater miracle is the 
power of Christianity to transform the world, and the indestructi- 
bility of the Church is again miraculous. I propose to consider this 
series of miracles, and to take as my subject to-day the growth of 
Christianity ; we shall see that it was so extraordinarily rapid as to 
deserve to be called miraculous. 

I, Our Saviour Himself foretold this rapid growth when He 
said: *‘The kingdom of Heaven is like to a grain of mustard-seed 


72 


RELIGION— FAITH— THE CHURCH 


. . . which is the least, indeed, of all seeds, but when it is grown 
up, it is greater than all herbs, and becometh a tree, so that the birds 
of the air come and dwell in the branches thereof” (Matth., xiii, 31, 
32). Yes, at the beginning the Church resembled a tiny seed, and 
the people belonging to her were a few fishermen and some women — 
persons of no wealth or education. Even after our Saviour’s resur- 
rection and ascension. His entire Church consisted of so few mem- 
bers that they could all assemble in one room, where they cowered in 
fear of the Jews, keeping the doors shut and hardly daring to speak 
above a whisper. The Church was indeed an insignificant grain of 
mustard-seed, until all at once there came a sound as of a mighty 
wind, and the tiny seed began to grow, being bedewed by Heaven, 
and its branches spread out so that the birds came to dwell there. 
They came from every part of the world, Parthians, Medes, Elam- 
ites, Mesopotamians from the Far East, Phrygians and Cappado- 
cians from Asia Minor, Egyptians, Arabs and Libyans from Africa, 
Jews and Romans — men of every known race and language. Before 
the Church was many hours old, they came to dwell on its branches, 
and whereas there had been only fifty or sixty members before, 
there were now over three thousand, and a few days later five thou- 
sand. Like a fierce bird of prey, Paul swooped down upon the 
birds on the branches, but soon joined them, meek and gentle as a 
dove. Jerusalem became too small to contain them all, and the 
Apostles went forth to preach. As St. John Chrysostom says, Peter 
took possession of Rome, the chief city of the world ; Paul travelled 
to and fro, making known everywhere the doctrine of Christ; An- 
drew undertook to instruct the philosophers of Greece; Simon 
taught the barbarians; Thomas clothed the swarthy Ethiopians in 
the white robe of Baptism; James occupied the see of Jerusalem, 
and Mark that of Alexandria on the Nile ; Luke and Matthew wrote 


MIRACULOUS GROWTH OF CHRISTIANITY 


73 


their gospels ; John dealt with the most profound points of theology 
and exercised his ministry at Ephesus; Bartholomew taught the 
Lycaonians, and Philip converted the Phrygians by his miracles — 
further and further spread the branches of the Church, which now 
contained many besides poor and ignorant persons. We hear of the 
conversion of Cornelius, a Roman centurion, of an official at the 
Queen of Ethiopia’s court, of Sergius Paulus, a Roman proconsul, 
and ere long the apostle of the Gentiles, who, in writing to the Philip- 
pians, sends them greetings from Christians at the imperial court. 
Scholars and philosophers were converted, men like Dionysius, Justin, 
Athenagoras, Gement, Ignatius, Polycarp, Quadratus, and Aristides, 
who, not satisfied with belonging to the Church themselves, did their 
utmost to bring others within her fold. Before the year 200 A.D., 
Tertullian, writing from Africa to the proconsuls of the Roman 
empire, says : “We are but of yesterday, and yet our adherents are 
to be found in all your provinces, towns, islands, fortresses, councils, 
assemblies, camps, palaces, law courts and even in the Senate. We 
have left you only your temples. If we went away, how desolate 
would be the cities ! If we migrated, what would become of com- 
merce and civic life?” (Tertull. Apol., 37). This statement may 
be somewhat exaggerated, but still it shows that Christianity had 
spread all over the empire, and even unbelievers acknowledge this 
to be true. Hamack, who misses no opportunity of depreciating the 
importance of the Christian religion, cannot deny that its growth 
was surprisingly quick, and writes : “The fathers of the Church are 
justified in asserting that their faith spread with incomprehensible 
rapidity in each generation. Seventy years after the foundation of 
the first community of Gentile Christians in Antioch, Pliny used 
very emphatic language with regard to the growth of Christianity 
in far-distant Bithynia, and spoke of it as already threatening to 


74 


RELIGION— FAITH-^-THE CHURCH 


supersede the other religions in that province. Seventy years later 
the dispute about Easter shows us that a Christian organization 
existed, having its centre in Rome and extending from Lyons to 
Odessa. Again seventy years later the Emperor Decius declared 
that he would rather tolerate the presence in Rome of a rival 
emperor than of a Christian bishop ; and barely seventy years more 
elapsed before the cross was attached to the Roman standards’^ 
(Harnack, Die Mission und Ausbreitung des Christentums, p. 545). 
The tree of the Church, indeed, displayed vigorous growth, and, as 
Harnack points out, this growth was most astonishing and incom- 
prehensible in its rapidity. 

2. Some, however, may think that the rapid growth of Chris- 
tianity, though astonishing, was not necessarily miraculous, in fact 
some of our opponents consider it quite natural, and draw attention 
to the fact that, as nearly the whole world was united under the 
Roman dominion, at the time when our Lord lived, it was almost 
inevitable that a world-wide empire should develop a world-wide 
religion. But is this really the case ? Of course it was ordained by 
God’s providence that the nations of the world should be politically 
united just at that period, and their union was an important factor, 
greatly facilitating the spread of Christianity; but those who think 
it possible to account for the origin and rapid development of a 
universal religion by pointing to political union, show their ignorance 
of history, and especially of religious history. The extension of 
their political power has in every age been an object of men’s 
desires, as it was to Xerxes and Alexander before the time of the 
Romans ; but in all the 4,000 years preceding the birth of Christ, we 
hear of no religion that aimed at embracing all nations. On the 
contrary each religion was national, and was well content to be so. 
The Hindoos, . Persians, Greeks and Egyptians all had their national 


MIRACULOUS GROWTH OF CHRISTIANITY 7S 

religion, that never extended beyond the borders of the land in 
which they dwelt. Rome possessed its own state-religion, but tol- 
erated within its walls the worship of all kinds of gods. No 
one conceived the idea of amalgamating all these forms of religion 
into one, that should be universal; even the Jewish faith, the only 
true pre-Christian religion, professed to be that of the Israelites 
alone. One solitary religion aimed at universality, since its Founder 
had ordered it to be preached to all nations, and had imparted to it, 
what He alone could bestow, the power to reach all men, and to 
be the grain of mustard-seed, destined to increase until it became a 
mighty tree, overshadowing the entire world. 

But, it may be asked, did not Islam spread with an equally incom- 
prehensible rapidity? It did indeed spread with fearful speed, but 
we cannot call it incomprehensible. Mohammed bade his followers 
use the sword, and promised them all that could gratify the passions 
of men, therefore it is not surprising that he found many adherents. 
Christ, however, taught a very different doctrine. He commanded 
St. Peter to sheathe his sword, and said that whosoever desired to 
be His Disciple must take up his cross and deny himself. No one 
can maintain that this teaching was likely to attract many converts, 
yet, nevertheless, Christianity spread at a marvellous rate. Some 
one may suggest that it was precisely the exalted character of Chris- 
tian teaching that appealed to the minds and hearts of individuals 
and nations. Christianity, of course, possesses glorious doctrines, 
and men of most powerful intellect have delighted in them, but at 
the same time its mysteries humiliate the understanding and its com- 
mandments are hard to obey, especially those which require us to 
love our enemies and to mortify the flesh. Therefore one would 
hardly suppose that, in spite of its beauties, Christianity would have 
at once found many friends. Subsequently the Catholic Church 


76 


RELIGION-^FAITH—THE CHURCH 


espoused the cause of science and art, and caused them to produce 
their finest masterpieces, but it was not so at first, for when St. Paul 
began to preach in Athens and St. Peter in Rome, they taught noth- 
ing but '^Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumbling-block and unto 
the Gentiles foolishness” (i Cor., i, 23). Theirs was the religion of 
the sick and poor; it inculcated charity such as the world abhors. 
Picture to yourselves St. Peter, at his first arrival in Rome. The 
city contained about two million inhabitants, all sunk in depths of 
ignorance and vice ; every lie was readily believed ; every crime was 
excused, if not actually applauded as a virtue. Picture St. Peter, 
still weary from his long journey, walking about the streets of 
Rome, and meeting one of those haughty philosophers, who had 
come to the centre of civilization in order to display their learning. 
Imagine him encountering Seneca, the most honest and straightfor- 
ward of all the Romans, and suppose that this great man had con- 
descended to engage in conversation with the stranger from Judaea, 
and to ask him why he had come to Rome. “I have come,” St. 
Peter would reply, “to found a new religion.” “Very well,” Seneca 
might say, “one religion more or less will make no difference, among 
the innumerable deities worshipped in Rome, there will be room, no 
doubt, for your God.” “My religion,” says St. Peter, “is to drive out 
all your religions, my God will replace all your deities, and all Rome, 
from the emperor to the poorest beggar, and in fact all the world 
will serve Him.” “Truly yours must be a mighty God! What is 
His name?” “Jesus, the crucified.” “What! a crucified God? 
Does He offer great attractions to His followers ?” “He bids them 
be chaste, patient and humble, and holds out to them the prospect of 
persecutions.” “What means do you intend to employ in spreading 
your new religion?” “I possess nothing but my staff.” “What are 
your intellectual attainments?” “I have none; I am a fisherman, 


MIRACULOUS GROWTH OF CHRISTIANITY 


77 


and know only how to cast my nets.” The pagan philosopher would 
. certainly not have wasted more time in conversation with such a 
man ; he would have smiled contemptuously and dismissed him from 
his thoughts. Yet, my brethren, we are not inclined to smile, for 
we know that St. Peter was right, and succeeded in his undertaking. 
He overthrew the pagan gods, and set up the cross on the Capitol ; 
his disciples traversed the length and breadth of the Roman empire, 
and converted it to Christianity. 

My brethren, who really accomplished the conversion of the 
world? Was it St. Peter, or St. Paul, or the other Apostles? Was 
the conversion effected by earthly power and human wisdom ? No, 
it is foolish even to suggest such a thing. The aim and the means 
of attaining it are absolutely disproportionate, the means are quite 
inadequate. Who then converted the world and caused Christianity 
to spread with such incomprehensible rapidity? St. Peter will sup- 
ply the answer. After the miraculous cure of the lame man at the 
Temple gate, the Apostle, addressing the multitude, said that God 
had effected the restoration of the cripple to health. In the same 
way God alone cured mankind suddenly and made them Christians. 
Christianity is His work. His greatest miracle; and St. Augustine 
was right when he said that the Christian religion was undoubt- 
edly propagated by means of miracles, but its extraordinary exten- 
sion was itself the greatest and most incomprehensible of them all. 

We have heard of the grain of mustard-seed, that represented the 
infant Church, so small and insignificant at first. But at Pentecost 
there was the sound of a mighty wind, and the Holy Ghost under 
the form of parted tongues of fire, came down and imparted to the 
tiny seed His own infinite energy and divine fertility. The seed be- 
gan to grow and finally became a mighty tree, overshadowing the 
j {whole earth, and we have good reason to rejoice in it, the holy Cath- 


78 


RELIGION---FAITH--THE CHURCH 


olic Church, and to thank God for allowing us to dwell on its 
branches. This tree affords us welcome shade and pleasant fruit; 
let us thank God for them, and resolve that, no matter what may 
befall, nothing shall ever cut us off from the Church; our children 
and grandchildren shall retain the faith of our forefathers. The 
Church IS always a living tree, preserving its youthful vigor and 
fruitfulnes ; it must continue to grow until it literally overshadows 
the whole world, and until there is no human being who does not 
dwell on its branches. Each of us can help to hasten this glorious 
day ; we need not actually be missionaries, but we can and ought to 
pray that that day may come. Let us think of it particularly when 
we say “thy kingdom come’^ in the Our Father. Moreover, there 
may be amongst us some who do not yet enjoy the happiness of 
living under the shadow of our glorious Catholic Church; let us 
show them, by the sanctity of our lives, how good and fair a thing 
it is to be a Catholic. Amen. 


THE TRANSFORMING POWER OF CHRISTIANITY 


79 


XII. The Transforming Power of Christianity 

Far away in Judea our Divine Saviour sowed a seed which 
sprouted and grew, until it became a mighty tree, stretching out its 
branches over the whole world, and the birds of the air, i. e., the 
nations of the earth, came and dwelt under its shade. This tiny 
seed was Christianity, and it grew with incomprehensible rapidity, 
as even its adversaries admit ; it grew with no natural resources, in 
fact, in spite of all manner of hindrances, in a truly miraculous way. 
The seed and the tree are plainly of Divine origin, for God alone 
could make an insignificant seed thrive and grow until it attained 
such majestic proportions. 

The spread of Christianity, marvelous as it is, is not the only 
miracle connected with it, nor the only proof of its Divine character. 
What do we mean by Christianity? It behooves us to answer this 
question, but, before we can do so, we must examine it more closely. 
The essential character and force of a thing is revealed in its 
activity. What, may we ask, was the activity of primitive Chris- 
tianity? What effect had it upon those who accepted its doctrines 
and obeyed its commandments? If you will listen attentively, my 
brethren, you will, I think, be convinced that we have here a 
miracle still greater than the outward extension of the Church ; its 
effects upon individuals, families and nations reveal its power to 
change and transform, and this power, though less tangible and vis- 
ible than its growth, is, nevertheless, an undeniable proof of the 
divinity of our holy religion. 

I. In the short parable of the leaven our Saviour taught us what 
the action of Christianity would be. ‘^The kingdom of Heaven,” 
He said, “is like to leaven, which a woman took and hid in three 


80 


RELIGION— FAITH^THE CHURCH 


measures of meal, until the whole was leavened” (Matt., xiii, 33). 
Meal is an inert mass, composed of many grains, each cold, motion- 
less and almost worthless. Put leaven into it and watch how it 
works; it seems to give life to the meal, which rises and moves as 
the fermentation proceeds, until at last the whole is leavened, and 
all the meal is bound together firmly, not a particle escapes the 
influence of the yeast, and it is transformed into a perfectly new 
substance, fit to be used as food. Meal symbolizes the human race, 
to which our Saviour added the leaven of His teaching, example 
and grace — and when the leaven had worked, the human race, pre- 
viously pagan, became Christian. In order to appreciate the magni- 
tude of the transformation, we should have to know the full misery 
and evil of paganism, but if I were to attempt to describe these 
things to you, I should have to speak of subjects unfit for mention 
before Christians. I need, however, only remind you of what 
St. Paul says in his epistle to the Romans, where he alludes to the 
foul desires of the heart, uncleanness, shameful passions, unnatural 
vice, iniquity, malice, avarice, wickedness, envy, contention and 
deceit. It is enough to remember that pagans as a rule were devoid 
of all mercy and pity and how could they be otherwise? Are not 
all these vices the natural outcome of the tendency to evil which 
the sin of our first parents implanted in every human heart? From 
whom could men learn anything better, or whence could they obtain 
moral strength to act differently? From their gods ? We have only 
to read the writings, I will not say of the Fathers, who may be 
regarded as prejudiced, but of the pagan authors, e. g., the dialogues 
in which Lucian, a pagan philosopher, depicts the thoughts and 
actions of these deities in accordance with the ideas of their wor- 
shippers. We find nothing but envy, jealousy, revenge, sensuality 
and passion. Yes, it was from their very gods that the unhappy 


THE TRANSFORMING POWER OF CHRISTIANITY 


81 


pagans acquired vices of which they might perhaps have been 
ignorant; they learned every kind of wickedness and remained 
devoid of mercy and pity. 

Let us now consider the working of the Divine leaven — the trans- 
forming power of Christianity. Scarcely had the new leaven been 
brought into the world when, slowly but surely, it began to work. 
What was dead, awoke to a higher, supernatural life; what was 
fleshly, became spiritual ; what was proud, became humble ; enemies 
became friends; the hard and cruel became merciful and compas- 
sionate; the human became divine; and all this was due to the 
leaven of Christianity. Even the pagans could not help seeing the 
change. The younger Pliny, in a report sent to the Emperor 
Trajan, says that the Christians bound themselves by oath not 
to commit crimes, but to refrain from theft and adultery, and to 
aim at loyalty and honesty. He had himself examined them, and 
found them guilty of no offence save the profession of Christianity 
(Ep., X, 97). Lucian says of the Christians that their first legis- 
lator impressed upon them that they were all brethren; they dis- 
played incredible activity, and where their chief interests were at 
stake, they shrank from no sacrifice (Peregrin, 13). Galen, a pagan 
physician, reports that it was a matter of everyday occurrence to 
see Christians facing death with more courage than any pagan philos- 
ophers would display, and he expresses great surprise at the control 
that they exercised over their passions, since they led pure and 
chaste lives in holy modesty, and many of them, men as well as 
women, renounced permanently even the permitted pleasures of 
family life (Galen. De sent, polit. Platon.). Hamack, commenting 
on this passage, remarks that it would hardly be possible to imagine 
a more unbiassed and splendid testimony to the high morality of the 
early Christians. 


REUGION-^FAITH-^-THB CHURCH 




Tertullian writes: '*The care that we take of the helpless, and 
our active charity are marks whereby our enemies recognize us. 
‘Behold,’ they say, “how these Christians love one another' — they 
themselves hate one another — ‘and how each is ready to die for the 
other’ — whereas they themselves are more inclined to kill one an- 
other” (Tertull. Apol., 39). Caecilius, a pagan writer quoted by 
Minucius Felix, says of the Christians : “They know one another by 
secret signs, and love one another almost before this recognition” 
(Min. Fel. Oct, 9). 

No wonder that the apologists of Christianity appeal to its en- 
nobling and sanctifying power, when addressing their pagan antag- 
onists. Justin, Tertullian, Clement of Alexandria and Origen all 
do this. “Look,” they say, “at our works, and tell us what fault 
you have to find with them. You persecute us, but can you convict 
of any real crime one of those whom you bring before your trib- 
unals? We are rated simply because we are Christians, you can 
reproach us with no other offence.” Men who could use such lan- 
guage must have been very sure of their own position. A most 
interesting instance of an appeal of this kind has been preserved in 
the so-called letter to Diognetus, the only manuscript containing it 
unhappily perished in the flames during the siege of Strassburg in 
the Franco-Prussian war. Diognetus, a pagan holding some im- 
portant office, seems to have asked a Christian friend for informa- 
tion about Christianity. Instead of writing a learned disquisition, 
the friend simply described the Christians’ mode of life. He writes : 
“Christians are not distinguished from other people by their lan- 
guage or country or outward customs. They do nothing extraor- 
dinary; they follow the national usage in their food and clothing — 
but if you study them you will see how, though they dwell on the 
earth, they are pilgrims bound for Heaven; they are in the flesh, 


THE TRANSFORMING POWER OF CHRISTIANITY 83 

but live not according to it; they are persecuted, and love their 
adversaries; they are poor and make many rich; they are despised, 
yet they bless. Such are the Christians, or, to sum it up shortly, 
they are to the world what the soul is to the body. The soul pre- 
serves and animates the body, which derives all its goodness and 
beauty from the soul. Such are Christians and such is Christianity; 
in fact, God alone could teach us, and nothing but the example of a 
God could enable us to be what we are ; in very truth, Christianity 
is not the work of men, but the power and strength of God have 
(made it what it is.*' 

2. It would be a delightful task to examine more closely the lives 
of the early Christians and to admire their virtues in detail. There 
is abundant material in the works of contemporary writers; the 
difficulty would be where to begin and where to end, and w’e should 
never have done. One point, however, is so conspicuous that it is, 
as it were, the keynote to all the passages that I have quoted. 
Everywhere we notice ^how the leaven of Christianity binds men 
together in charity that embraces enemies as well as friends. Our 
Divine Saviour Himself said : “By this shall all men know that you 
are my disciples, if you have love one for another" (John, xiii, 35) ; 
and : “Love your enemies, do good to them that hate you, and pray 
for them that persecute and calumniate you" (Matt., v, 44). He 
taught His disciples to have brotherly love for one another; He 
proclaimed: “Blessed are the merciful," and His actions showed 
His sympathy with all sufferers. His followers understood His 
teaching, for St. Paul says: “If I speak with the tongues of 
men and of angels, and have not charity, I am become as sounding 
brass or a tinkling cymbal" (i Cor., xiii, i), and St. John: “Let us 
love one another, for charity is of God. . . . God is charity" (i 
John, iv, 7, 16). 


84 


RELIGION— FAITH-^THE CHURCH 


If you want to see how the early Christians obeyed this law of 
charity, read the Acts of the Apostles, in which we are told that 
they were of one heart and one soul; read the epistles of St. Justin, 
Martyr, of which Harnack, a writer by no means enamored of 
Christianity, says that they contain a vast amount of charity and 
sympathy. Do not imagine this charity to have been blind and 
sickly so as to cause the poor and needy to be helped in some mis- 
taken way, and to lead to nothing else. No, this charity was wise 
and discriminating. According to the earliest regulations, no man 
fit for work was to be supported for more than two or three days. 
“If he be an artisan, let him work for his food, and not be idle; if 
he will not, he is making Christianity a source of profit, and you 
should beware of such a person” (Doctr. Apost., 12). “Give work 
to those who are fit for work, and show mercy to those who are 
unfit” (Epist. Clem., 8). How was this mercy shown? Tertullian 
gives a beautiful account of the money collected for the support of 
the poor, the education of orphans and the care of the aged (Tertull. 
Apol., 39). The Church in Rome wrote to that in Corinth about the 
year 96 : “Who has not experienced your hospitality? Who does not 
know that you would rather give than receive ? Who has not heard 
of your well nigh insatiable desire to do good? Who is not aware 
that you vie with one another day and night in striving to benefit 
the brethren?” Pope Cornelius said that the Christian community 
in Rome supported 1,500 widows and persons in need of help 
(Euseb. Hist, eccl., vi, 43). Great kindness was shown to widows, 
whom Polycarp calls “the altar of God” (ad Phil. 4). On many 
Christian monuments in Gaul we read: “he ransomed prisoners.” 
Aristides remarks (Apol. 15) that the Christians spoke of slaves as 
their brethren, whereas the pagans sometimes used them as food 
for their fishes. Dionysius, a bishop, thus describes the ravages of 


THE TRANSFORMING POWER OF CHRISTIANITY 


85 


the plague in Alexandria : ‘‘The pagans forsook those who were sick- 
ening with the disease; even their nearest and dearest they cast 
half-dead into the streets and left the corpses unburied. But our 
brethren did not shrink from danger; on the contrary they fear- 
lessly visited and tended the sick, and many laymen, as well as 
priests, died in consequence” (Euseb. Hist. Eccl., vii, 22). A simi- 
lar account of the great pestilence in the time of Maximinus Daza 
is given by Eusebius (ix, 8 ) : “The charity of the Christians was 
then most plainly revealed to all pagans, who actually praised the 
God of the Christians, and acknowledged that His followers alone 
were truly good and God-fearing men.” 

Charity towards enemies was a virtue wholly unknown to the 
pagan world, but how many instances of this heroic charity, utterly 
impossible to unregenerate human natbre, have been recorded in 
every century of the Christian era! Who taught St. Stephen to 
pray for his enemies? Who gave the saints strength to love their 
adversaries? We read in the Lives of the Saints of St. John Gual- 
bert, a Florentine officer of high birth. His only brother had been 
killed in a quarrel, and John was full of revengeful thoughts, when 
one day, being himself surrounded by his men, he met his brother's 
murderer. He drew his sword, only to let it sink, for the mur- 
derer came up with his arms crossed upon his breast, and begged 
for mercy; and John remembered that it was Good Friday. “Love 
one another,” “love your enemies,” were the words frequently 
uttered by our Saviour, but on Good Friday He set us an example 
of infinite charity. 

I have tried briefly to describe to you the power of Christianity 
to transform men’s hearts. It is a theme so lofty that the tongues 
of angels would never weary of it. Such virtue, and above all such 
charity, is indeed a great miracle, and the writer of the epistle to 


RELIGION-^FAITH^THE CHURCH 


m 

Diognetus might well say of the Christianity of the Second Century 
that it was not the work of men, but the power of God. 

But, my brethren, Christ is the same yesterday, to-day, and for- 
ever, and the force of Christianity has not changed during all its 
existence. Can we, however, truthfully assert that Christians are 
still the same? Should we venture to bid the opponents of Chris- 
tianity consider our way of life? Are we filled with charity? I 
will not allude to the indescribably sad spectacle presented by those 
who, whilst they call themselves Christians, never cease to despise 
and slander the holy Catholic Church and her children. No, theirs is 
no true Christianity, for they have not the spirit of Christ. Let us 
rather look at home. How is it that our lives bear so little resem- 
blance to those of the early Christians? Why are we so eager for 
amusement, so easy-going, so uncharitable towards our neighbors. 
We are often told that we ought to improve and are in great need 
of reformation — and it is true, though not in the sense in which 
the remark is generally made, viz., that we should do well to dis- 
courage popular devotions, and say our prayers in English. No, 
these are mere externals; the reform that we require is in our 
lives. And how is this to be effected? There is only one way, the 
same way that at first brought about so wonderful a transformation 
among men. Let us apply this method, and have recourse to the 
Divine leaven of our Saviour’s doctrine, example and grace. This 
leaven must work in our hearts and in our daily life, and when it 
does so, we shall behold fresh miracles, and shall be like the early 
Christians, humble, obedient, temperate and full of active charity 
towards others. This is the reformation that we want, and it will 
be the most glorious triumph of our holy religion. Amen. 


THE INBBSTRUCTIBIUTY OF CHRISTIANITY 


87 


XIII. The Indestructibility of Christianity 

No sooner had the infant Church begun to grow, and the leaven 
of Christ's grace and doctrine to work, than enemies arose, anxious 
to destroy Christianity. They did not think that this would be a 
difficult task, for if once the shepherds were slain, the flock would 
scatter. Consequently they laid hands on the Apostles, although 
even this proceeding seemed hardly necessary, since Gamaliel, a man 
highly respected by the Jews, advised them to refrain from meddling 
with the Christians and said: ‘‘Let them alone; for if this work 
be of men, it will come to naught, but if it be of God, you cannot 
overthrow it” (Acts, v, 38). This was good advice, for men’s 
work does not last, but soon passes away, especially if it runs coun- 
ter to human pride and passion. Gamaliel was right, and it was 
really superfluous to persecute the Christians. Nevertheless, Christ 
had foretold the persecutions, and God permitted them to arise. 
Christians have suffered at the hands of Jews and Gentiles, and in 
every country and every age. They have been persecuted by the 
state, by the learned and by the ignorant, and it is impossible to 
describe all the tortures that they have endured. And for what 
reason? We cannot fathom all God’s designs, but we acknowledge 
their wisdom. Gold is tried in the furnace, and Christians in suf- 
fering and affliction. Our Saviour was hated and persecuted, and 
the disciples must be like their Master. But there was one thing 
that God particularly desired the persecutions to effect, viz., to 
prove the impossibility of destroying Christianity. Gamaliel said: 
“If this work be of God, you cannot overthrow it.” This is what 
God intended; men might bring all their cunning, hatred and vio- 
lence to bear upon Christianity, and would never succeed in de- 


88 


RELIGION-FAITH-THE CHURCH 


stroying it. This fact would prove beyond all question that God 
was its author. The testimony of blood, the strongest and most 
convincing of all kinds of testimony, was to uphold the truth and 
divinity of Christ’s teaching. 

In the Acts of the Apostles we read of an occurrence that may 
be taken as typical of the hostility that Christianity would encounter. 
Some of the Jews came forward to dispute with Stephen, and as 
they could not resist his wisdom and spirit, they suborned men to 
bear false witness against him, they stirred up the people and they 
denounced him to the government. Finally, when Stephen defended 
himself they cast him forth and stoned him. We see that the ene- 
mies of Christianity begin with words. The Jews treated Stephen 
and the other disciples just as the Pharisees had treated our 
Saviour. They tried to show that there were contradictions in the 
doctrine taught, they looked upon the new religion with suspicion, 
as being unpatriotic and hostile to the state, and they despised the 
Christians as foolish and credulous. It was not long before pagans, 
too, came forward as opponents of Christianity. Lucian, who has 
been called the Greek Voltaire, held it up to ridicule in his Peregri- 
nus, and spoke with the utmost scorn of Christian charity and en- 
durance of martyrdom. He laughed at Christianity, knowing well 
that nothing is more deadly than derision. He was followed by 
others, two of whom, as Harnack says, are a host in themselves. 
These were Celsus and Porphyry. The former wrote two books 
against Christianity in which he discovered nothing good. He calls 
it the bastard of Judaism, the most debased of all religions. He 
shows great skill in representing the sects as antagonistic to the 
Church, and Christ as at variance with the Apostles. All that was 
good in Christ was, according to Celsus, borrowed from the Greek 
philosophers, and everything original was error and deception. He 


THE INDESTRUCTIBILITY OF CHRISTIANITY 89 

considers the Resurrection nonsense, and faith in Divine Providence 
an absurd piece of presumption. Being a shrewd man, Celsus 
understood how to make his views sound very plausible, but Por- 
phyry was a still more dangerous foe. St. Augustine calls him a 
great and learned philosopher and a bitter opponent of Christianity. 
He wrote fifteen books against the Christians ; he displays a certain 
amount of respect for our Lord^s person, but has an intense desire 
to overthrow His teaching. With vast study of Holy Scripture and 
inexhaustible industry, he collects everything that appears to him 
offensive or contradictory in the Christian religion, and evinces pecu- 
liar dislike of its teaching regarding the creation and end of the 
world, and our Lord^s incarnation and resurrection. 

What did these men effect? They did what they could, and did 
it as well as any of their successors. If we collect all that in sub- 
sequent ages has been said and written against our holy religion, 
we must confess that Celsus and Porphyry said it all, and said it, 
in many cases, with more intelligence and shrewdness ; and yet they 
accomplished nothing, for they could not resist the wisdom and 
spirit of Christianity. Aristides, Justin, Apollinaris, Athenagoras, 
and above all Origen came forward as the champions of our faith, 
and wrote the most brilliant works in its defence, and now no one 
troubles about Lucian, Celsus and Porphyry, whilst every one has 
heard of Origen, the man of brass and steel, as he has been called, 
who, according to Epiphanius, wrote several thousand books in de- 
fence of Christianity. We admire him so much that we feel grateful 
to Celsus for having aroused such a giant. If you were to study 
Origen’s writings, you would see how accurately he answers all 
his opponents' objections, and how thoroughly and cleverly he re- 
futes them. For instance he triumphantly disproves the assertion 
that Christianity attaches no value to education and learning and 


50 


RBLIGION-^FAITH^THE CHURCH 


is a religion fit only for simpletons. He declares education and 
learning to be excellent things, and says that Christianity, far from 
depreciating them, encourages and promotes them. He skilfully 
turns the reproach of novelty into an argument in support of Chris- 
tianity, by pointing out that, though it is not long since Christ 
founded His Church, no mere human being could possibly have 
accomplished so much in so short a time. He challenges any one 
to convert even a hundred persons from vice and wantonness, and 
make them good and virtuous, yet Christianity has, he says, suc- 
ceeded in transforming countless multitudes, in spite of the most 
stubborn opposition on the part of emperors, rulers, generals and 
governors in towns and also among the people. Christianity tri- 
umphed everywhere, and thousands of converts were made in 
Greece and in every country of the world. Does not this prove 
that it must be of Divine origin? (Orig. c. Celsum 3, 48; 1, 26 
sq.). When we read words like these we are filled with confidence 
and assurance. If new enemies come forward to assail Christianity, 
individuals among us, being ignorant of history, may feel alarm, 
but we know that our foes can do nothing ; even such men as Har- 
nack and Haeckel are pigmies in comparison with Celsus and Por- 
phyry, and their arguments have long ago been refuted by Origen 
and other Fathers of the Church. Let them therefore do their 
worst; we need not be afraid, and may boldly tell them that they 
are too late ; all their statements were made ages ago by men who 
were unable to resist the wisdom and spirit of Christianity. No 
philosopher or scholar has ever destroyed, or ever will destroy, th? 
Church of Christ ; all that her enemies attempt adds to her triumph, 
since Christianity comes from God, and is not the work of men. 

In his latest work Harnack speaks of his predecessors, Celsus 
and Porphyry as if he almost regretted their failure to destroy 


THE INDESTRUCTIBILITY OF CHRISTIANITY 


91 


Christianity ; he accounts for their want of success by saying that no 
professor can triumphantly resist a universal religion like Chris- 
tianity, unless indeed he wields the sword as well as the pen of a 
reformer {Die Mission, p. 356). Neither Celsus nor Porphyry 
wielded the sword, nor, happily, does Professor Harnack wield it; 
but have not many other foes used it against Christianity? The 
Jews, being unable to refute what St. Stephen said, nevertheless 
began to persecute the early Church, for they imprisoned the Apos- 
tles and stirred up both the Roman governors and the populace 
against them. It is a remarkable fact that to the present day wher- 
ever the most virulent attacks have been made upon Christianity, 
Jews have always had something to do with them, and they found 
apt pupils in the pagans I 

You surely have heard of the terrible persecutions during the 
first few centuries; as many as thirty Popes suffered martyrdom, 
and we learn horrible details from the Acts of the Martyrs and the 
writings of the Fathers. Nero accused the Christians of setting 
Rome on fire, and many were covered with pitch and burnt as torches 
in his gardens; he also caused St. Paul to be beheaded and St. 
Peter to be crucified. Trajan had no desire to hunt out the Chris- 
tians, but he put them to death if accusations were brought against 
them and they refused to deny their faith. It was in Trajan’s 
reign that St. Ignatius was thrown to the wild beasts. Hadrian em- 
powered the Roman governors to execute Christians simply on the 
ground of their faith. Marcus Aurelius went further and authorized 
the tracking down of Christians; it was in his reign that St. Poly- 
carp was burnt to death. Decius carried on a vigorous persecution, 
aimed particularly at the bishops. Valerian used to exile priests in 
the first instance, but, because that did not silence them, he ordered 
them to be slain. Christian officials were removed, deprived of their 


92 


RELIGION--FAITH-THE CHURCH 


property and beheaded. It was in this reign that St. Cyprian and 
St. Lawrence, the deacon, died as martyrs. The most merciless 
persecution of all took place under Diocletian, who issued four edicts 
of gradually increasing severity against Christians. Many had their 
legs broken, others were burnt, others flayed alive; fresh tortures 
were constantly devised, and the executioners were exhausted, so 
great was the number of victims. People of all ranks perished, but 
especially aristocrats and women; we read of the martyrdom of 
Agnes, Lucy, Anastasia, A fra and many others. The persecution 
spread to all parts of the Empire. Thousands perished whose names 
have not come down to us, although some are recorded in the Roman 
Martyrology. 

If Christianity had been of merely hiunan origin, it would have 
been uprooted, but, as it was, these persecutions effected noth- 
ing. Many Christians were slain, but many others at once took 
their places ; churches were destroyed, and the faithful had to hide 
in the Catacombs, but no sooner had the persecution ceased for a 
while, than they came forth and rebuilt their temples, making them 
more beautiful than before. We may even assert that Christianity 
benefited by persecution, which not only lopped off dead branches 
and purged away false doctrines, but also promoted the external 
growth of the Church in a very wonderful manner. A farmer, who 
wishes to increase his seed corn, plants it in the earth. This is a 
symbol of the Church, regarding which Tertullian writes very beau- 
tifully (Apol., 50) : *Wou may torture and rack us, but what does 
your cruelty avail? The more you mow us down, the more does 
our number increase. The blood of martyrs trickles from their 
mangled bodies and falls on to the fruitful soil of the Church, where 
it brings forth fresh Christians : Semen est sanguis Christianorum/* 
Yes, the blood of martyrs is the seed of the Church — it has ever 


THE INDESTRUCTIBILITY OF CHRISTIANITY 93 

been the most glorious evidence of the truth of Christianity, and 
furnishes, as St. Augustine says, a threefold testimony to it. One 
witness may believe in Christ, but hardly have courage so much as 
to whisper His name ; another believes and boldly confesses his be- 
lief; a third, besides believing and confessing, actually dies for 
Christ's sake. The testimony of the third is the greatest of all 
(Augustine, Sermo 286). The testimony of blood has a marvelous 
effect. Think again of St. Stephen; among those who stoned him, 
one was conspicuous for his violence, and he guarded the clothes of 
the rest, because, as St. Augustine says, he desired thus to cast 
stones by the hands of all who stoned Stephen (Augustine, Sermo 14 
de Sanctis). Did Saul not heed the sight of the saint borne down 
by the heavy stones? Had his prayer for his enemies no effect? 
We can judge for ourselves — for Saul was soon afterwards con- 
verted and became Paul, the Apostle of the Gentiles. Stephen's 
death was indeed precious ; the martyr's triumph was glorious ! A 
simple deacon died, and by his death bestowed upon the world the 
great Apostle, who converted thousands to Christianity. Was not 
in this case the martyr’s blood the seed of fresh Christians? And 
the same story was repeated again and again. When a Christian 
was about to suffer, the pagans assembled, partly out of curiosity, 
partly to satisfy their desire for bloodshed. They saw these men, 
who were always in danger of death, standing calmly to receive their 
sentence ; they heard their fearless profession of faith, and saw them 
enduring most terrible tortures with patience, whereas the utterance 
of a single word would have secured their freedom. Not men alone, 
but women, children and maidens suffered martyrdom. St. Ignatius 
actually longed to encounter the wild beasts, and St. Lawrence jested 
as he was being roasted to death. Must not the spectators, if they 
were capable of serious reflection, have said to themselves : “A relig- 


94 


RBLIGION^PAITH^THE CHURCH 


ion with such witnesses, a faith imparting such courage and stead- 
fastness, must be good’^? Would they not eventually arrive at the 
conclusion that Christianity owed its origin to God, and not to men ? 
St. Jerome writes: ^‘Anyone who has witnessed the heroism of the 
martyrs under torture, and their exultation in the midst of their suf- 
ferings, must perceive how the sweet fragrance of a true knowledge 
of God arises from their blood, and must realize in the secret 
recesses of his heart the truth of the Gospel, since otherwise men 
would not defend it with their lives.*’ Semen est sanguis Christiano- 
rum. New Christians spring up from the martyrs* blood, and their 
testimony is the strongest and most convincing proof of the truth 
of Christianity. 

Yes, Christianity is absolutely unconquerable; neither the skill 
of unbelievers nor the violence of the rabble can overthrow it, and 
we know that this must be the case, for our Divine Redeemer prom- 
ised that the gates of hell should never prevail against His Church. 
The promise was made in the first instance to St. Peter, His imme- 
diate successor, and it is written in letters of gold round the dome 
of St. Peter’s in Rome, above the Apostle’s tomb. It is well for us 
often to call this promise to mind, since Christianity still has many 
enemies, who would fain destroy it and make it vanish from the 
face of the earth; but we feel no alarm, because we know it to be 
invincible, since it is Divine. Our forefathers rejoiced when they 
were called upon to shed their blood for the faith. It is an honor 
for us to be the descendants of martyrs ; would that we always acted 
in accordance with this dignity ! Non magna loquimur, sed magna 
vivimus, exclaims St. Cyprian — our deeds, and not our words, are 
great. This should be the aim of every Christian now, as it was 
during the persecutions; but alas, we still hear the cry: panem et 
circenses, give us food and amusements — it behooves us, as Chris- 


THE INDESTRUCTIBIUTY OF CHRISTIANITY W 

tians, to show that we have higher ideals, and do not shrink from 
pain and the cross, under whatever form we may have to bear it. 
There is much indifference towards the doctrines and command- 
ments of Christianity, some are too careless, others too cowardly, to 
acknowledge their faith. Let us Catholics, the descendants of mar- 
tyrs, never forget our glorious forefathers, but regard our holy faith 
as our most precious treasure, professing the same proudly and joy- 
fully both in deed and in word, but especially in deed, for words 
alone are not enough. Magna vivimus, yes, great, heroic deeds befit 
all who are worthy to be called Christians. Amen. 


96 


RELIGION— FAITH— THE CHURCH 


XIV. A Martyrdom 

Our religion comes from God, who has Himself, by means of 
prophecies and miracles, signed and sealed the documents relating 
to its foundation. The Giurch resembled a tiny grain of mustard 
seed at first, but speedily developed into a mighty tree, and like 
leaven, working in men's hearts, she soon converted the nations to 
Christianity. She accomplished this in spite of much opposition, 
and the enemies of Christianity have furnished us with the best 
evidence of its Divine origin, since they called into being so many 
Christian apologists and martyrs. As we have seen, the blood of 
martyrs supplies the strongest and most convincing evidence in 
support of our holy faith; it is indeed, as Teftullian says, the seed 
of Christians. 

We discussed this subject last time, but it is worth while to re- 
turn to it, and let it sink deeply into our hearts. Let us to-day 
consider a group of martyrs, and try to picture them before our eyes, 
and listen to their very words. A little book, that has come down 
to us from the Third Century, contains the account of the martyr- 
dom of St. Perpetua and St. Felicitas. It is not merely a gem of 
early Christian literature, but it would be difficult to discover any- 
where a more touching work, or one more full of poetical beauty. 
It was valued very highly in the early Church, and St. Augustine 
tells us that in the Fifth Century it used to be read aloud to the 
faithful at public worship. He himself preached no less than three 
sermons on it. Its chief value consists in the fact that the greater 
part of it was written by St. Perpetua, whose martyrdom it records, 
on the eve of her death. Let us transport ourselves in thought to a 


A MARTYRDOM 


97 


prison in Carthage, where five people are assembled, some of them 
being easily recognizable as slaves. In their midst is St. Perpetua, 
a young woman of 22, whose dress and bearing show that she is of 
noble birth. In her arms she holds a little child, baptized not many 
days before. Let us listen to what she is saying: “I shuddered 
when we entered the prison, for never had I been in such darkness 
and heat, and outside was the noise of the soldiers guarding us. I 
was consumed with anxiety about my child, until at last we were 
permitted to spend a few hours in a better and more airy place. 
Everyone thought of himself, but I thought only of my child, and 
fed him as best I could, fearing very much for his life, since he was 
visibly wasting away. I commended him to the care of my mother, 
who came to visit us, but I could not part with him, and took him 
back with me to prison. He grew better, and my relief was so 
great that the prison seemed preferable to a palace.” This is a 
plain and simple story, my brethren, but infinitely touching. This 
aristocratic lady was content to be with slaves, and happy in her 
gloomy prison. She loved her child too tenderly to give him up, 
and yet she saw him languish in confinement. What gave her 
courage to endure her lot? She was a Christian and if she had 
denied her faith, she would at once have been set at liberty; but 
she refused to utter this word, and rejoiced at being permitted to 
suffer such insults and ill-treatment for her religion. Does not this 
show how much strength and courage Christianity can impart? 

Perpetua's father, who was still a pagan, had done his best to 
induce his daughter to recant ; she asked him : “Father, seest thou 
the vessel yonder?” he answered: “Yes.” “Can we give it a differ- 
ent name than that which it bears?” “No.” “Well then, I am a 
Christian and cannot be called by any other name.” The father 
was angry, and so far forgot himself as to strike his daughter, but 


98 


RELIGION-^FAITH—THE CHURCH 


afterwards he visited her in prison. She relates how he came in, 
broken down with sorrow, and said : “My child, have pity upon my 
gray hairs ; have pity upon thy father, if indeed I am still thy father. 
Remember all that I have done for thee and how I favored thee 
above thy brothers. Bring not such disgrace upon me, thy mother 
and thy whole family. Save thyself for the sake of the child, 
who cannot live without thee.” “And then,” she goes on, “he kissed 
my hands, and cast himself down before me, weeping and sobbing. 
O what anguish did I feel! but I composed myself, and said: 
“Father, take courage ; what God wills, must be done, we are in His 
hand.” Then in deep distress he left me, and on the following day 
we were taken before the judge, and lo I my father was there, with 
my child in his arms. He came up to me and said : “Have pity on 
thy child and do sacrifice.” The pagan governor, too, said : “Have 
mercy on thy father’s gray hairs and on thy little child, and make 
an offering to the gods.” I replied: “I cannot.” Then the judge 
asked: “Art thou therefore a Christian?” and I answered: “Yes, I 
am a Christian.” My father still stood there, and as he would not 
withdraw, the judge ordered him to be expelled and struck with a 
rod. O what pain did that cause me ! more than if I myself had been 
struck. My poor old father I We were condemned to be cast to the 
wild beasts, and joyfully returned to the prison. I wished to take 
my child with me, in order to feed him, but they refused me per- 
mission, and lo, by God’s merciful providence, the child from that 
moment no longer craved his mother’s breast, and I was com- 
forted.” 

There is another episode, which we cannot pass over at a time 
like the present, when we are thinking so much of dear ones who 
have passed away. One night Perpetua had a dream in which she 
saw her youngest brother Dinocrates; he seemed to be shut up in 


A MARTYRDOM 


99 


some dark place, and was trying to draw water from a well, in 
order to quench his thirst ; but he could never reach the water, as 
the wall round the well was too high. Perpetua was distressed at 
this dream, and prayed for her brother, and soon after in another 
dream she saw him again, but this time he was wearing gorgeous 
robes, and was radiant with health and strength. Again he ap- 
proached the well, took a golden cup that lay ready, and, bending 
over the water, filled the cup and drank; then he gaily passed on 
out of sight. Perpetua perceived that Dinocrates had been de- 
livered from Purgatory by her prayers. 

At last the day came for her release from suffering. She stood 
in the arena, with downcast eyes, praying in silence. She and her 
companion Felicitas were stripped of their outer garments and 
wrapped in nets, and then a wild bull rushed at her and tossed her 
high in the air. She fell to the ground, drawing her undergarment 
about her, because, as we read, she cared more for modesty than 
about pain. Her hair flowed loose about her shoulders, and she 
knotted it up, thinking it unfit for a martyr, at the hour of her 
triumph, to have her hair unbound as if she were in mourning. 
Then, taking Felicitas by the hand, she rose once more to her 
feet, and, beholding her friends, she cried out to them : “Stand fast 
in the faith.” At last the executioner came up and drew his sword. 
Perpetua stretched out her neck and received the mortal stroke. 
Picture the scene, my brethren, and if you have opportunity, read 
the book for yourselves. 

Perpetua was a true woman, full of tender anxiety about her 
child and of compassion for her brother in his sorrow. How great 
was her love for her father, and how bitterly she grieved at the 
sight of his tears and the insults heaped upon him! Was there 
ever a better mother, a more loving daughter and sister? Perpetua 


100 


RELIGION— FAITH— THE CHURCH 


was all this in spite of being a Christian, nay rather, because she 
was a Christian. No such woman can be found among the pagans. 
The faith and law of Christ never destroy what is good and noble 
and sacred in the human heart, but they perfect it, rendering it 
divine. Consider Perpetua’s courage ; she was a weak, timid woman, 
thrust into the awful darkness of a filthy prison. On the one hand 
were the strongest natural feelings, love of child and parents, and 
on the other the most terrible agony and death. There could not 
be a more painful struggle between inclination and duty, nor could 
a greater sacrifice be demanded of any one. When Coriolanus was 
besieging Rome, the priests came out to ask for mercy, then his own 
wife and children, but he was inflexible. Finally his old mother 
came to him, and he gave way; “Mother,"' he cried, “thou hast 
saved Rome, but lost thy son.” Perpetua was stronger than Corio- 
lanus. Before her stood her aged father, with her infant son in 
his arms, weeping, sobbing, and imploring her to recant, and her 
heart must have been almost broken; yet she did not waver. She 
loved her father and her child above everything in the world, but 
she loved God infinitely more; and she could not be false to Him. 
She had heard the words: “He that loveth father or mother more 
than me, is not worthy of me; and he that loveth son or daughter 
more than me, is not worthy of me” (Matt., x, 37). She followed 
her Saviour's example, and His grace, purchased with His precious 
Blood, gave her strength to make a sacrifice such as no natural 
courage would have enabled her to make. Is not Christianity able 
to effect marvels? 

The martyrs acknowledged frankly and plainly that they bore 
their sufferings for the sake of Christ, their Lord and God, and that 
their death was a testimony to the divine origin of Christianity. 
St. Ignatius, before his martyrdom, was asked why he called him- 


A MARTYRDOM 


101 


self Theophorus, the bearer of God, and he replied that it was 
because he bore within him Christ, who is God. When Polycarp 
was urged to renounce Christ, he turned his eyes to heaven, and 
said: “I have served Him for 86 years, and never has He done me 
any harm; how can I be disloyal to Him.” You have heard how 
Perpetua answered : cannot offer sacrifice ; for I am a Christian.” 
Notice the words: I cannot. They mean: You may shut me up in 
a dark prison, you may shed my blood, my father may curse me, my 
child may be torn from me, my heart may break; but I cannot 
offer sacrifice ; I am a Christian. Perpetua spoke thus to her father, 
to the Roman governor, and to the pagan rabble. After she had 
been tossed by the furious bull, after the sword had pierced her, her 
blood still proclaimed her a Christian. What a glorious testimony 
for Christ! 

The martyrs died for Christ, and He triumphed in them; to 
Him be the honor and glory! And what was the result of their 
victory? St. Augustine tells us that we ourselves are the result. 
Just as Christ died for us, so did the martyrs die ; their blood was 
poured out on the earth, and from the furrows thus fertilized sprang 
up an abundant harvest of Christians. O let us ever rejoice and 
exult in them ! If we acknowledge Christ to be our Lord and God, 
if He is our Teacher and Guide through life's pilgrimage and will 
hereafter be our reward, if we, in short, are Christians at all, we 
owe it in a great degree to the martyrs and the testimony borne 
by them to Christ and His Church. The people of Jerusalem 
spread their garments in our Lord’s way, but the martyrs laid, as 
it were, their own bodies on the road to the heavenly Jerusalem, in 
order that their divine master might pass over them and enter 
His kingdom in triumph. ”Let us,” says St. Augustine, ”not fail to 
pluck at least some branches from the trees by the wayside; i. e., 


102 


RELIGION^FAITH^THE CHURCH 


to derive some benefit from the martyrs' teaching and example, and 
to join their cry of Hosanna" (Sermo 280). 

My Brethren, we profess the same faith, and like St. Perpetua 
we can exclaim: “We are Christians." But it is not enough to be 
baptized; it behooves us also to stand firm in the faith, as St. Per- 
petua exhorted her friends to do. She and all the other holy 
martyrs urge us to stand firm in the faith, and their voices should 
not fall on deaf ears. The Catholic faith does not demand of us 
sacrifices such as those made by Perpetua and the other martyrs, who 
gave up everything and even life itself for it, but still we, too, must 
make our little sacrifices, and overcome our love of comfort, self- 
indulgence, indifference and human respect. It may be that even 
this will cost some of us dear, but what of that? We are Christians ; 
we must stand firm in the faith. Men and women, remember Per- 
petua, and do not let yourselves be put to shame by one so frail and 
timid as she was. The Christian faith, that inspired and strengthened 
her, will bestow on you also power and courage to profess your 
religion fearlessly and to live in accordance with its precepts. 


AUTHENTICITY OF THE GOSPELS 


\ 0 $ 


XV. Authenticity of the Gospels. 

God and man, united chiefly by love — this is religion ; it is strictly 
in conformity with nature and a matter of course, but it is also 
indispensable, if man is to attain his final end and to live an honest 
life. Just as there is only one God, so is there only one true reli- 
gion, and the idea that it is quite indifferent which creed one pro- 
fesses, is foolish and sinful. But which is the true religion ? Surely 
that which God has revealed, not one discovered in nature or in 
the voice of conscience alone, but the one which, as St. Paul says, 
God has revealed at various times through the prophets, and finally 
through His Son Jesus Christ. This supernatural revelation is pos- 
sible, it is most beneficial to us, and absolutely necessary on account 
of the supernatural aim assigned us by God. It has actually taken 
place, and this is a fact as certain as anything recorded in history; 
it is guaranteed and proved by the prophecies and miracles, which 
were the credentials of those commissioned by God to convey it to 
us, and the supreme testimony to its genuineness is the greatest of 
all miracles, the glorious resurrection of Christ. Additional evi- 
dence is supplied by the religion founded and perfected by Christ, 
and by the influence over Christendom of this religion, which we 
have seen to be miraculous in its growth, its transforming power 
and its indestructibility. Finally there is the unmistakable testi- 
mony of the blood shed by Christas followers for His sake. 

We have considered all these great and important truths, and 
confirmed our conviction of the truth of our holy religion, and at 
the same time have kindled within our hearts a more ardent affec- 
tion for the Catholic faith. 

To-day we have to answer a fresh question : Whore do we di^ 


104 


RELIGION; FAITH; THE CHURCH 


cover divine revelation ? Whence do we derive in all their integrity 
the truths that God has taught us, and the commandments that He 
bids us keep? From your childhood you have known the answer 
to this question — the sources of revelation are Holy Scripture and 
the oral tradition of the Church. To speak first of the former: — 
how are we to be sure of the authenticity of the books contained in 
the Bible? are they genuine? can we believe that they are, as the 
Church asserts, divinely inspired? What can be said for or against 
modern criticism of these books? What about the Bible and natural 
science? Finally, what is the attitude of the Catholic Church 
towards Holy Scripture? All these are very important questions, 
constantly asked at the present time, and we ought to know how 
to answer them. 

To-day let us discuss the authenticity of the Bible. We cannot 
consider each of the 45 books of the Old and the 26 books of the 
New Testament separately, nor is it necessary; it will suffice for 
our purpose if we fix our attention upon the four Gospels, since 
they contain the chief doctrines taught in the other books, most of 
which are mentioned in the Gospels. We regard a work as gen- 
uine, if it was really written by the author to whom it is ascribed, 
or at least dates from the period when it professes to have been 
compiled. We must see therefore whether the four Gospels were 
really written by the four men, who either themselves claim to be 
the authors, or at least are believed by all Christians to have been 
such. 

1. The first of these men is Matthew, a tax collector in the 
neighborhood of Genesareth. He tells us himself that Jesus, see- 
ing him, said: ‘‘Follow me,” and Matthew rose up and followed 
Him. Matthew listened to our Lx)rd*s sermons and witnessed His 


AUTHENTICITY OF THE GOSPELS 


105 


miracles, and with the other apostles received the Holy Ghost at 
Pentecost. Afterwards he preached first in Galilee, and then in 
Ethiopia, but before quitting Palestine he deposited with his coun- 
trymen there the record of his chief instructions. This book is the 
on^ that we know as the Gospel according to St. Matthew, and it 
was written perhaps as early as the year 42, and certainly before 
65 A. D.. It was written originally in Hebrew, but was translated 
into Greek during the apostle’s lifetime. He wrote primarily for 
Jewish converts to Christianity and, therefore, he assumes his read- 
ers to be familiar with the customs and localities of the Holy Land 
and with the Old Testament prophecies. His great aim is to prove 
Jesus Christ to be the Messias foretold by the prophets, and to show 
that Judaism, which was intended to prepare His way, had now 
lost its significance. 

The second Gospel is called that of St. Mark, who was one of St. 
Peter’s disciples, accompanied him on his journeys, and was com- 
missioned by him to found the church in Alexandria. The Gospel 
was written in Rome about the year 65. St. Mark gives us much 
information, derived from St. Peter, regarding our Lord’s words 
and works; and apparently he took especial pains to impress upon 
his readers, the Christians in Rome, with how much truth St. Peter 
had exclaimed : “Thou art Christ, the Son of the living God” (Matt., 
xvi, 16). 

The third evangelist is St. Luke, who was originally a pagan 
physician, and after his conversion became St. Paul’s companion. 
He wrote his Gospel about the year 65, his aim being to preserve 
the Apostle’s oral instructions in writing, for the benefit of all his 
converts, but particularly for the Greeks, and consequently St. Luke 
employed very carefully selected Greek expressions. His Gospel 


10 ^ 


RELIGION; FAITH; THE CHURCH 


is the historical development of the great truth stated by St. Paul 
in his Epistle to the Romans (i, 16) : ‘The gospel is the power of 
God unto salvation to everyone that believeth, to the Jew first and 
to the Greek ; for the justice of God is revealed therein from faith 
unto faith.” 

The fourth Gospel is that according to St. John; it was written 
in Ephesus about the year 96, and was intended to supplement the 
three other Gospels, with which St. John was undoubtedly ac- 
quainted. He emphasizes the fact that he had himself been an 
eyewitness of the events recorded. “We saw his glory” (i, 14) ; 
“That which we have seen and have heard, we declare unto you” 
(1 John, i, 3). At the time when he wrote there were already 
heretics who denied the Divinity of Christ, and so St. John rises, 
as it were, like an eagle soaring above the things of earth, and re- 
lates what had been revealed to him above. “In the beginning was 
the Word” that became flesh in the person of Jesus Christ, “and 
the Word was with God, and the Word was God.” St. John was, 
as he himself tells us, the disciple whom Jesus loved, and who 
leaned on our Lord’s bosom at the last supper. Hence he knew his 
Master’s goodness and mercy better than anyone else, and in ex- 
treme old age he, remembering this love, never wearied of repeating : 
“My little children, love one another.” 

These are our gospels ; I need not describe their contents, for you 
know them well enough, and have been familiar with them since 
you were at school. Every Sunday you hear a passage from one 
of them read aloud, and the sermon is often an explanation of it. 
No doubt you occasionally read the Bible, and especially the Gos- 
pels, for yourselves, and can appreciate their dignity and simplicity, 
their unity preserved among a variety of detail. As St. Irenaeus 


AUTHENTICITY OF THE GOSPELS 


107 


says, we have a fourfold Gospel, but one spirit pervading it, and 
everything speaks to us of Christ, our Saviour, revealing Him as 
God, and teaching us to love Him. 

2. You must not expect me to quote all that learned men have 
written to prove the authenticity of these Gospels. Who could ques- 
tion it, unless he desired at all costs to deny it? The Gospels speak 
for themselves, their language and style, the statements regarding 
places, opinions and historical events, all show them to be the 
work of eyewitnesses. We possess very ancient manuscripts that 
we value very highly, and scholars rejoice whenever a fresh one 
is discovered, and often blindly accept its testimony as true. This 
is the case with the works of all ancient writers, but of the Gospels 
there exist many very old manuscripts, no less than 540 of St. 
Matthew’s Gospel, nearly 600 of St. Mark’s, 530 of St. Luke’s, 
and about the same number of St. John’s. The oldest manuscripts 
are the Codex Vaticanus, the Codex Sinaiticus, discovered in 1859, 
and the Codex Syro-Sinaiticus, discovered in 1892; all of which 
belong to the fourth Century. In times of persecution attempts 
were made to destroy the sacred books of the Christians, as well as 
the Christians themselves, but it was all in vain. It is interesting 
to note how comparatively few manuscripts of the famous pagan 
authors have come down to us, although no one questions the 
authenticity of their works. Of Vergil there is but one manu- 
script of the 4th or 5th century; the earliest manuscript of Horace 
dates from the 8th, of Plato from the 9th, of Homer and Herodo- 
tus from the 10th century. Moreover there are very early transla- 
tions of the Gospels; one in Latin and one in Syriac belong to the 
2nd, Coptic translations to the 3rd, Ethiopian to the 4th; and the 
great Gothic translation by Bishop Ulfilas to the 5th century. This 


108 


RELIGION; FAITH; THE CHURCH 


last is known as the Codex argenteus, and during the Thirty Years* 
War it was taken by the Swedes to Upsala. Further we have the 
evidence of the Fathers, some of whom were the disciples of the 
Apostles themselves. There is scarcely a verse in the Bible, and 
especially in the Gospels, that is not quoted by them, and quoted 
more than once, so that, if all our Bibles were to perish, they could 
be reconstructed from the writings of the Fathers. For instance, 
St. Irenseus of Lyons was separated by one generation only from 
the apostolic age. Not many of his works have come down to us, 
but in the fragments that remain there are about 400 references 
to the Gospels, as we know them. In one passage he alludes to the 
four evangelists by name, and says : ‘"J^st as there are four regions 
of the heavens, and four quarters whence the wind blows, so are 
there four Gospels, forming pillars on which rests our Church, that 
extends over the whole world. These Gospels stand fast, and it is 
a new and irresistible proof of their authenticity that even their 
enemies, the teachers of heresy, testify to it, since each tries to 
establish his heretical doctrine by appealing to the Gospels. Woe 
to him who tampers with them*’ (Iren. Adv. haer. hi, 11). 

There is no need of further evidence; one fact alone suffices. 
The Gospel is the legal code of the Church, and she is convinced 
that she received it through the Apostles, and she has continued 
to regard it as a most precious treasure. It is not a private but 
official document. The Church has ever looked upon it as such, 
and as her own peculiar possession, which might not be given to 
pagans. She placed it in the hands of her own children, and taught 
them from its pages the truths necessary for salvation ; her bishops 
watched over its purity and only such as had been properly ordained 
were permitted to read it publicly at divine worship. Justin Mar- 


AUTHENTICITY OF THE GOSPELS 


109 


tyr writes : ‘*On Sunday all assemble, both townsfolk and peasants, 
and the records of the Apostles and the books of the prophets are 
read aloud, and when the reader has finished, the president gives an 
address, exhorting his hearers to practise this good teaching” (Jus- 
tin, Apol. i, 67). No one questions the authenticity of the laws of 
his own country, and it is equally impossible to doubt that of the 
Gospels. There are of course books which are not genuine, such 
as the so-called Gospel of St. Peter. These books were, as a rule, 
written with good intentions, and for a time, and especially in 
out of the way places, enjoyed a certain reputation, but they were 
spurious, and consequently the Church rejected them. When 
Serapion, a bishop, heard that St. Peter’s Gospel was being read, he 
at once strictly forbade its use, and wrote: “We, my brethren, 
accept Peter and the other Apostles as we accept Christ Himself, 
but we reject what falsely bears their names” (Euseb. Hist, eccl., v, 
12). A man would have to be a fool, as Irenseus says, to deny the 
authenticity of the Gospels. 

The children of the Church have always reverenced these holy 
books, and at the time of Diocletian they preferred to die rather 
than give them up to unbelievers. The greatest care was taken to 
prevent any alteration in the text. A very striking illustration of 
this care is given by St. Jerome and St. Augustine. In the book 
of Jonas we read how the prophet, in his weariness of life, lay down 
to sleep outside the city of Ninive, and God caused a plant to 
grow over his head to shelter him. In Hebrew this plant is called 
kikajon, which in the early Greek and Latin translations is rendered 
by words meaning gourd. St. Jerome thought that it was not a 
gourd, but a kind of ivy, and translated the Hebrew by ephera. His 
translation was read aloud in an African church, and St, Augus- 


110 


RELIGION; FAITH; THE CHURCH 


tine tells us that the people, who had always heard that Jonas slept 
under a gourd, on hearing the new word were astonished and 
raised a great uproar, so that the bishop was in danger of expul- 
sion, and felt obliged to consult the Jews in the town about the 
real signification of the Hebrew word, and then, acting on their 
information, restored the old rendering, gourd, as more correct than 
ivy. In St. Jerome’s opinion the disturbance was due to an absurd 
trifle, for the difference between a gourd and ivy is unimportant, 
but the Christians thought otherwise; they were peculiarly sensi- 
tive where their sacred books were concerned, and would not have 
them altered. No treasure has ever been more jealously guarded 
by both Church and people, for they know that God has entrusted 
to their charge the precious books in which He Himself has record- 
ed His word and commandments. 

There is no reasonable possibility of doubting the authenticity 
and the apostolic origin of the Gospels. Men are easily enough 
satisfied in other respects, and credulous, when it pleases them. At 
the present day Buddhism finds many adherents, and Buddhist com- 
munities have been formed in some large cities. What can be said 
for the authenticity of the books about Buddha? Who wrote them? 
When did the authors live? No one can say, but they certainly 
lived long after Buddha himself. These books come from India, 
a land where men’s imaginations run wild, and there is no guar- 
antee that the text has been accurately preserved, or that the copy- 
ists have not tampered with it. Max Muller declared that these 
works were not trustworthy, and another scholar goes so far as 
to say that in other matters a historian would be ashamed to treat 
them as genuine sources of information. In comparison with these, 
our Gospels appear perfectly authentic; they were written in the 


AUTHENTICITY OF THE GOSPELS 


111 


centres of civilization by men who actually heard and saw what 
they record, and were read by thousands who had witnessed the 
occurrences described in these books. No one doubts their authen- 
ticity except a few persons, who question it because they do not 
like the doctrines and commandments contained in the Gospels. 
No book in the world is so unquestionably genuine as the Bible, 
and no fact in history is supported by such irrefutable evidence as 
the apostolic origin of our Gospels. Amen. 


112 


RELIGION; FAITH; THE CHURCH 


XVI. Credibility of the Gospels 

The Gospels resemble a mighty stream, and the books of the 
Old Testament are its tributaries, whilst the books of the New 
Testament are like fountains fed by its water. Whatever the Church 
teaches us as a truth revealed by God, is derived primarily from 
this stream, of which St. John speaks in the Apocalypse (xxii, 1), 
saying: *‘He showed me a river of water of life, clear as crystal, 
proceeding from the throne of God and of the Lamb.'* Therefore 
for us everything depends upon the Gospels being really what the 
Church declares them to be. We saw last time that they were 
genuine and that their text was not corrupt. 

At the present day copies of the Gospels are in the hands of 
thousands, and they are officially read in every church ; do you think 
it would be possible for some man to come forward with an unknown 
book, perhaps of his own composition, and to say that it had been 
written by one of the four evangelists ? Could he even alter a single 
sentence in the Gospels, and maintain that the evangelist had origi- 
nally written it thus? No, of course such a proceeding would be 
impossible now, and it was equally impossible 18CX) years ago. Ever 
since the end of the first century the authenticity and accuracy 
of the Gospels have been unquestionable. 

“But," some one may say," are we bound to believe what they 
contain?" To you, who know them to have been written under 
divine inspiration, this question seems superfluous and even blas- 
phemous, for, when God speaks, can man venture to ask whether 
His words are worthy of belief ? Let us however for the moment 
disregard the divine inspiration of the Gospels, and look at them 
simply as historical records, compiled by ordinary men; we shall 


CREDIBILITY OF THE GOSPELS XU 

still find them to be more trustworthy than any other books in the 
world. 

1. It is no new thing for the enemies of Christianity to doubt 
the trustworthiness of the Bible, and it is well for us not to lose 
sight of this fact. In the 2nd Century Celsus and Julian the Apos- 
tate asserted that the Gospel narrative had been invented by the 
disciples of Christ and the evangelists, simply in order to deceive 
others. This assertion was made again in the 18th Century by 
Reimar, who added that Christians were like parrots, ready to repeat 
whatever falsehood was told them. Some unbelievers however 
thought that Reimar went too far, and this statement was condemned 
even by Strauss, who considered that the miraculous events, re- 
corded in the Gospels, had their origin, not in any intentional decep- 
tion, but in poetical legends. The Romans told wonderful stories 
of Jupiter, the Greeks of Zeus, and the Germans of Wodan, but 
nobody imagines these tales to be true, they are simply myths or 
beautiful poetical legends. Strauss took the same view of the Gos- 
pel account of our Lord’s life and miracles. Others reject this 
theory, because myths and legends originate only in prehistoric ages, 
and what is told us of Jesus belongs to a period, the history of 
which is particularly well known. These critics suggest that we 
need not trouble about miracles, since they admit of a perfectly 
natural explanation. When we hear that Jesus raised the dead to 
life, they were not really dead, but only in a trance. When the 
demoniac was cured in the land of the Gerasenes, we are told that 
the man only imagined himself to be possessed. At that rate the 
2,000 swine into whom the devil entered, after being cast out of the 
man, must also have imagined that they were possessed, or they 
would not have rushed into the sea ! 

We read in the Gospel how Christ told Peter to cast his line into 


114 


RELIGION; FAITH; THE CHURCH 


the sea, and in the mouth of the first fish caught would be found a 
stater, the coin required for the tribute money. Paulus explains 
this to mean that the Apostle was to catch a fish, carry it to market, 
and sell it for a stater; he would have to open its mouth in order 
to take out his hook ; or else perhaps he was to open his own mouth 
and shout out that he had a fish for sale. Explanations such as 
these do not satisfy other critics, who consider the matter rather 
more complicated, and have recourse sometimes to one, sometimes 
to another method of accounting for the miracles in the Gospels. 
Occasionally they discover what they call a legend arising out of 
the limited intellectual capacity or the momentary mental attitude 
of a spectator. Where they light upon a passage that is not to 
their taste, such as the angel’s message, affirming the miraculous 
birth of the Redeemer, or the words : “Baptize in the name of the 
Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost,” in which the 
mystery of the three divine Persons is mentioned, they pronounce 
it spurious, and call it an interpolation. “What,” they ask, “is the 
use of all these details ? What does the doctrine of the Incarnation 
matter ? One thing only is essential — ^the fact that God is our loving 
Father. , It is quite possible that our Saviour’s hearers, and even the 
evangelists, may not have understood Him correctly, and hence it 
is conceivable that the Christianity of Christ diflfered from that of 
the Bible and the early Christians.” Harnack speaks in this strain, 
and so does Abbe Loisy, who, with wonderful self-effacement, boasts 
of simply transcribing the assertions of German infidels. 

2. You see, my Brethren, that there are many who deny the 
trustworthiness of our Gospels, and their reasons for doing so are 
very various. Some declare that there are contradictions in the 
Gospel narrative, and that the evangelists give conflicting accounts 
of the same occurrence. This statement is by no means true ; there 


CREDIBILITY OF THE GOSPELS 


115 


are indeed differences, but there are no contradictions. St Augus- 
tine says: “If two historians describe the same event, and the one 
notices one point, the other another; if the one writes in great 
detail and the other more concisely, surely no one would say that 
they contradict each other and are not speaking the truth.” Again : 
two artists may paint the portrait of one and the same person; 
they may be equally skilful, but the likenesses that they produce 
are not identical, being the work of two different men, each of 
whom depicts what strikes him most in the features, bearing and 
dress of his model. The two portraits are both good and faithful 
likenesses, but they are different ; there is however no contradiction 
between them. 

Let us apply these arguments to the Gospels. We have here four 
artists, the four evangelists, all of whom depict the same subject; 
their work differs, but it is not therefore false or contradictory. 
The fact that their descriptions vary, is, as St. John Chrysostom 
rightly points out, a proof of their honesty. “If they had related 
everything in precisely the same way, with the same details of time, 
place and circumstance, we should be justified in suspecting them 
of a plot to deceive us. But, as it is, the very diversity of their 
accounts bears testimony to their trustworthiness” (Chrysost. in 
Matth. horn. 1, 2). 

Other critics object to the stories of miracles, and ask whether 
miracles are possible. This is the point that arouses the indignation 
of unbelievers, who, because they dislike miracles, reject the whole 
Bible. They assert miracles to be impossible, but no one has proved 
this to be the case, and, as we have already seen, God, being Al- 
mighty, can dispense with His creatures and the forces of nature, 
and can Himself effect whatever He wishes ; therefore miracles are 
certainly possible. We have considered also the significance of 


116 


RELIGION; FAITH; THE CHURCH 


miracles, and have seen that without them Christianity would be 
impossible, and, unless the Holy Scriptures, that contain the account 
of the origin of Christianity, contained also an account of miracles, 
they would not be worthy of belief. Hence the fact that they record 
miracles is the grandest proof of the trustworthiness of our sacred 
books, because it is a proof that comes from God. 

We need not, however, waste time over the enemies of the Gos- 
pels ; they fail to agree, and this alone is enough to condemn them ; 
they even contradict one another, and consequently cannot all be 
right. We read in the book of Daniel that when the two elders 
had brought a false charge against Susanna, Daniel questioned them 
separately, and asked under what kind of tree they had seen her. 
One replied: “Under a mastic tree,” and the other: “Under a 
holm tree.” Daniel thus found out that they were lying, and told 
them that their own falsehood had brought destruction upon them. 

When we ask men why they refuse to accept the Gospels, some 
answer that it is because the evangelists are deceivers ; others main- 
tain that they are not deceivers, but simply collectors of legends; 
others again declare that they were ignorant people, unable to see 
or hear well, and scarcely aware of what they were saying. You 
see how these critics contradict one another, and thus show their 
statements to be false. Holy Scripture is unaffected by their asser- 
tions, and its truth cannot be gainsaid. 

3. There is however other evidence that we can adduce in sup- 
port of the trustworthiness of Holy Scripture. We trust a historian 
who, having opportunities of knowing his subject, intends to record 
it. Very well ; the evangelists were certainly in a position to know 
about our Lord. Matthew was His constant companion, John was 
His favorite disciple, Mark and Luke associated with St. Peter and 
St. Paul. The events recorded took place publicly, and were ob- 


CREDIBILITY OF THE GOSPELS W 

served by many witnesses, including some who were hostile and 
suspicious. Our Saviour wished His Apostles to bear testimony to 
Him, because, as He said, they were with Him from the beginning, 
and they declare emphatically that they saw and heard what they 
wrote down. St. Luke says that he ‘‘diligently attained to all things 
from the beginning,” and St. John writes:. “That which we have 
heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked 
upon, and our hands have handled ... we declare unto you” (I 
John i, 1, 2). The evangelists intended to record what they knew, 
as we can see from their mode of writing, which is plain and 
accurate, even in unimportant matters. For instance St. Luke tells 
us that our Saviour left His disciples on the Mount of Olives, and 
went on “a stone's cast”; also that Peter cut oif Malchus' right 
ear. Details of this kind can be given only by eyewitnesses, or by 
those who have gathered them from eyewitnesses. Matthew and 
Luke give our Saviour's genealogy, even at the risk of making mis- 
takes. Luke fixes very precisely the date when the word of the 
>Lord came upon St. John in the desert; it was in the 15th year of 
the reign of Tiberius, when Pontius Pilate was governor of Judea, 
and Herod tetrarch of Galilee — no one writes so precisely who does 
not intend to be honest and tell the truth. Matthew says that Herod, 
hearing about the wise men,” was troubled, and all Jerusalem with 
him; and he assembled together all the chief priests and scribes, 
etc.” If this had been false, anyone, who happened to have been 
in Jerusalem at the time, would at once protest that he had never 
heard of the wise men's coming. I might refer to dozens of similar 
passages, but it is not necessary; the evangelists were sure of their 
facts, and simply put them on record. If they had not been honest 
men, would they have told us so frankly of their own blunders and 
those of their friends? would they have related instances of their 


118 


RELIGION; FAITH; THE CHURCH 


own dullness, vanity, jealousy, timidity and cowardice? The very 
word ‘‘publican” has something derogatory about it; no one applies 
it to Matthew, but Matthew describes himself as a publican ! How 
simply are the most astounding events, such as raising the dead, 
recorded! There is considerable reserve, and almost incredulity 
displayed with reference to miracles, and no secret is made of St. 
Thomas's want of faith. We cannot doubt that the evangelists were 
honest, when we read what they wrote. 

Moreover it would have been absolutely impossible for them to 
invent our Lord's discourses, or to imagine His supernatural life 
and love, His divine and majestic form. Even Rousseau acknowl- 
edges that such things cannot be the work of any one's imagination ; 
“the stamp of truth is so plain, so astonishing and so inimitable here, 
that one who could invent such a hero, would be greater than 
the hero himself.'' Why should the evangelists write what was 
untrue? No one lies without some object in view, and it could 
do them no good to extol their Master at the cost of the truth. 
They expected Him to give them earthly power, but He died, and 
they were disappointed. Their preaching and writing could bring 
them no advantage, on the contrary, they exasperated Jews and 
Gentiles to such a point that the Apostles were imprisoned and put 
to death, solely because of their testimony to Christ. False witnes- 
ses do not allow themselves to be killed for the sake of their evi- 
dence ; and this is an additional reason for believing that the evan- 
gelists honestly wrote down what they knew to be the truth. 

My Brethren, it is foolish or even insane to deny the authenticity 
of our Gospels; they bear an unmistakable impress of truth, and 
their trustworthiness is confirmed by the inability of their enemies 
to disprove it. 

When St. Dominic was struggling to convert the Albigenses, the 


CREDIBILITY OF THE GOSPELS 


119 


heretics proposed to consign to the flames their own controversial 
works and those of St. Dominic. The former were immediately 
consumed, but the fire did not touch the book in which the saint 
had defended Catholic truth; on the contrary the flames formed a 
radiant crown above it, and the astonished spectators were converted. 
This may be only a pious legend, and not historically true, but 
there is at any rate one book that has been miraculously preserved, 
and this is the Bible. It has been subjected to hostile criticism 
from the first moment of its existence ; it has been cast into the fire 
of doubt and suspicion, and its style, matter and historical statements 
have been criticized. Yet it has always emerged from the fire un- 
scathed, and each fresh attempt to destroy it has resulted in proving 
it to be absolutely authentic and trustworthy* 


120 


RELIGION; FAITH; THE CHURCH 


XVII. The Divine Origin of Holy Scripture 

In the choir of the Church of the Lateran in Rome is a mag- 
nificent mosaic, representing our Saviour looking down from 
Heaven. Below is a symbolical representation of the Holy Ghost; 
a stream of clear water flows on either side, and beside it grow 
lofty palms; stags and lambs are quenching their thirst in the 
water — you know the stream; — it is that of which St. John speaks 
in the Apocalypse, saying: *‘He showed me a river of water of 
life, clear as crystal, proceeding from the throne of God and of 
the Lamb*^ (Apoc., xxii, 1). The river is Holy Scripture, and 
its waters are deep and clear ; there is nothing fabulous or legendary 
in the Bible, as there is in so many other books; each part of it is 
the work of the man to whom the Church ascribes it, and the text 
has come down to us pure and uncorrupt. What is written in the 
Bible is the truth, as we have seen in our last two conferences, and 
we know that no book in the world is so thoroughly genuine and 
trustworthy as the Bible as a whole, and the four Gospels in par- 
ticular; they form the chief part of Holy Scripture, and contain, 
as it were, the teaching of all the other books. 

Whence has the Bible derived this peculiar privilege ? And what 
bestows upon it this exceptional authenticity and trustworthiness? 
What makes it a holy book? And what causes its waters to be 
waters of life, able to quench our thirst for truth, to refresh us in 
the wilderness of this world, and to prosper our efforts to do good? 
St. John tells us that the river proceeds from the throne of God 
and of the Lamb. This is the reason why the Bible is unlike all 
other books and stands absolutely alone — it is the work of God, 
and not merely of man. This divine origin of Holy Scripture is 


THE DIVINE ORIGIN OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 


121 


our subject to-day; may God, who has given us the Bible, bless 
our study of it. 

1. In saying that the Scriptures are God's work, I do not mean 
that men had nothing to do with their compilation. God called 
His creatures into existence and in His wisdom He chooses to use 
their cooperation in all that affects them. Even when His action 
is direct and independent of the forces of nature. He still employs 
His creatures in working miracles. You know how He changed 
water into wine; He could of course have created wine with equal 
ease; but, instead of doing so, He ordered the servants to fill the 
waterpots with water, and then changed this water into wine. Of 
course He could, if He had chosen, have given us a sacred book, 
written and completed by Himself. But He did not choose to do 
this, for writing books is the business of human beings, and there- 
fore God, when He desired to communicate His truths to us in a 
book, employed human beings to write it. They were not however 
mere machines, writing down what was dictated to them, but they 
were rational and intelligent men ; and God took them as they were. 
Some, like Matthew and Peter, were plain, simple people; others, 
like David, Isaias, Luke and Paul, were highly educated and learned 
men. We can trace these differences in the style and language of 
the books that God employed them to write. God took them as 
they were, with the knowledge that they already possessed, and 
what they knew from other sources, or had seen and heard for 
themselves. He did not reveal to them. We must remember further 
that God intended the Scriptures for men of every nation and every 
age, but primarily for the contemporaries of the men whom He 
employed. Thus the books of the Old Testament were designed 
in the first instance for the Jews. Hence He caused the men in 


122 


RELIGION; FAITH; THE CHURCH 


His employ to write in the manner most natural to themselves, and 
most comprehensible to their immediate readers. 

Though she may be a learned woman, a mother, in speaking to 
her child, uses childish language; and in the same way God stoops 
to the level of men’s understanding, and speaks to them through 
their fellow men. This consideration explains many things that 
we otherwise should find difficult. For instance, we see why God, 
in dealing with the imaginative people of the East, so often employs 
symbols and parables; why He speaks to the Jews, a carnally 
minded race, of milk and honey, of the fat of the land and the 
fruits of the field, and why, although He knew that the earth moves 
round the sun. He adopted the language current among the people 
then and now, and allowed Josue to express himself as if the sun 
moved round the earth. All this becomes intelligible and even 
obvious, when we bear in mind that God wrote Holy Scripture 
through human agency and for human beings. 

2. Nevertheless Holy Scripture is of divine origin, since God 
is its author, and He inspired the men, whose names stand at the 
heading of the various books, to write them. What exactly is the 
meaning of ‘inspired’ ? It does not mean that Gk)d wrote the books 
Himself, nor that He guided the writer’s hands, as a teacher guides 
a child’s, nor that He dictated the actual words; no; God made 
use of the writers with their abilities and knowledge, but still He 
inspired them, that is to say. He first chose the men through whom 
He intended to make His communications, and prompted them to 
write, so directing their understanding and will, that they wrote 
down just what God wished to be written, and nothing else. They 
may have already known the things that God wished written, of 
God may from time to time have revealed these things to them. 
After what has been said, it is obvious that God preserved them 


THE DIVINE ORIGIN OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 


123 


from making mistakes as they wrote. The whole matter will ap- 
pear more intelligible if we imagine a king, who wants to make 
some important communication to his people. Accordingly he 
sends for the prime minister or for one of his counsellors to write 
it down. The king orders this man to write, and tells him what to 
say, but the minister supplies the words and frames the sentences ; 
yet nevertheless the thoughts are the king's, so what he writes 
is really the king’s utterance. In order, however, that the docu- 
ment may express the king’s views fully, and nothing beyond 
these views, the king watches to see what is being written, to 
ensure its being a faithful expression of what he intends to say. 
When the proclamation is composed, it is published all over the 
country, and received by the inhabitants as emanating from their 
sovereign. God acts in a similar fashion; He wants to declare 
His will to the human race, and to do so not merely orally, as when 
He spoke through the prophets. In His infinite wisdom and love 
He wishes to commit it to writing, that all may read it. Therefore 
He summons one of His secretaries, Moses, or Isaias, or Matthew, 
or Paul, and tells him what is to be made known to mankind. When 
they have accomplished their task, the books are entrusted to the 
care of the Church, who gives them to the faithful, and they receive 
them as indeed the word of God. Since God inspired Holy Scrip- 
ture, and since all that it contains, proceeds from Him, it follows 
that nothing but truth can be found in it. There may be mistakes 
in the manuscripts or in the translations of the Bible, but they are 
due to human errors, and have nothing to do with the Scriptures 
themselves. As we have seen, God took the men, whom He chose 
to write down His communications, just as they were, with all their 
defects ; their language and style might be more elegant, and here 
and there their statements might be more precise, but absolute 


124 


RELIGION; FAITH; THE CHURCH 


mistakes are plainly impossible. How could there be mistakes on 
matters of faith, revealed to us by God in Holy Scripture? It is 
inconceivable — nor are there blunders in the philosophical or his- 
torical language used to clothe these doctrines of faith or to eluci- 
date them. In a book like the Bible, written in various languages 
and under peculiar circumstances, it is not always easy to decide 
in what sense some particular passage should be imderstood, 
whether it is to be interpreted literally or figuratively, or as a para- 
ble; but there can never be a mistake in the Bible itself, because 
it was given us by God, who is incapable of falling into error, or 
of leading us into it. In this respect Holy Scripture resembles our 
divine Saviour, who, as St. Paul says, in His sacred humanity 
resembled us men, even in our weakness ; there was only one point 
of difference, viz. sin, which could not touch Him. So is it with 
Holy Scripture ; any mistake in it would have to be ascribed to God, 
and therefore none can possibly exist. 

3. This is what we mean when we say that Holy Scripture is 
divinely inspired; but what can we reply, when we are asked how 
we know it to be really the word of God? Some people, not alto- 
gether without reason, say that it is enough to study the book itself, 
with its majestic simplicity and lofty moral teaching, to be con- 
vinced that it must come from God. More than one person, on 
reading it, has exclaimed, like the disciples at Emmaus, who had 
talked with our Saviour without recognizing Him: *‘Was not our 
heart burning within us whilst He spoke?” There is indeed no 
book in the world like the Bible, but this is not sufficient to prove 
with certainty that it is of divine origin. We possess however one 
testimony that is unimpeachable; God Himself vouches for it. As 
we have already seen. He gave the Bible to His Church, and she, 
the infallible teacher of His doctrine, assures us that the Scriptur«a 


THE DIVINE ORIGIN OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 


12S 


are the word of God. She stated this fact emphatically at the 
Councils of Florence and Trent, and again at the Vatican Council, 
where she solemnly declared that the books of the Old and New 
Testaments are to be regarded as sacred and canonical “because 
they were written under the inspiration of the Holy Ghost, and 
have God as their author, and as such were entrusted to the 
Church/' Long before the Church defined anything on the subject, 
two great Apostles had borne testimony to the divine origin of 
Holy Scripture. St. Paul writes (2 Tim., iii, 16) : “All scripture, 
inspired of God, is profitable"; and St. Peter (1 Peter, i, 21): 
“The holy men of God spoke, inspired by the Holy Ghost." The 
Fathers taught the same doctrine most plainly. St. Clement, who 
was a disciple of the Apostles, calls the Scriptures “divine utter- 
ances," “true utterances of the Holy Ghost." Irenaeus says that 
they were “dictated by God's Spirit." According to Justin Martyr, 
“the Holy Ghost made use of the writers in order to play to us 
divine melodies, as upon a lyre." St. Augustine, in reply to the 
question, “What is Holy Scripture ?" says : “It is a letter addressed 
by Almighty God to His creatures." The same Saint does not 
hesitate to put it on a level with the most holy Body of Christ. 
St. Bonaventure expands this idea, when he says: **Verhum in- 
creatum, incarnatum, inspiratum'* — the uncreated Word in the 
bosom of the Father; the incarnate Word in Christ; the inspired 
Word contained in Scripture. In another place the same Saint 
remarks : “Holy Scripture is God's heart, in which He reveals to us 
His love ; it is the mouth of the Father, the tongue of the Son, and 
the pen of the Holy Ghost." 

The Church herself speaks still more loudly and emphatically, 
and shows the utmost reverence when Holy Scripture is read. 
Before the Gospel at Mass the priest has to stand in front of the 


126 


RELIGION; FAITH; THE CHURCH 


altar, bending low whilst he beseeches God to purify his heart and 
lips that he may worthily proclaim the Gospel. After reading it, 
he stoops to kiss the book in token of deep veneration and ardent 
love. 

At one period the pagans called upon the Christians to surrender 
their sacred books, knowing how precious they were, and that a 
surrender of these books involved a denial of God and of the faith. 
Rather than comply with this demand, the Christians suffered mar- 
tyrdom. Felix, an African bishop, said: ‘^Before the word of God 
is cast into the flames, I will be cast into them myself.” After 
Felix had endured imprisonment and bondage for a long time, and 
had finally spent four days in a ship's hold without food and drink, 
he was asked on landing: “Why do you not surrender your sacred 
writings? have you none in your possession?” His reply was: 
“Certainly I have some, but I will not surrender them.” The 
governor of the town ordered him to be put to death, and he was 
taken to the place of execution, where he cried out : “I thank Thee, 

0 my God, that during the fifty-six years of my life here below, 

1 have kept my body chaste, have preached the faith and have 
defended the Gospel.” These were his last words (Ruinart, Ada 
Martyrum, p. 390). Is it as great a thing to defend the Gospel as 
to preserve chastity and preach the faith? The holy bishop seems 
to think it so, and he is right; in fact, it is a still more glorious 
thing, since the Gospel is the Word of God, and worthy of the 
reverence that we owe to Him. 

Can you now appreciate Holy Scripture at its real value and 
understand St. John’s words in the Apocalypse and the mosaic 
picture in the Lateran? Do you see what is represented by the 
river with the water of life, clear as crystal, proceeding from the 
throne of God and of the Lamb — the river on whose banks gro^ 


THE DIVINE ORIGIN OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 12 /[ 

flowers and trees of wonderful beauty, and to which the bceists 
of the forests come to quench their thirst? 

Never forget to reverence Holy Scripture as the word of God; 
never quote it lightly, and never allow others to laugh at it. God 
gives us His Word for our instruction, admonition, comfort and 
encouragement. We need no other books, and nothing could ever 
take its place. Let us say with the author of the Following of 
Christ: “All scholars may hold their peace, for God alone shall 
speak to us.“ Read the Bible regularly and come to hear it ex- 
pounded in church; treat it with respect. We are told of St. 
Charles Borromeo that he invariably knelt to read Holy Scripture. 
Read it with attention and holy desires. In the Following of Christ 
we are told that two things are necessary for us on our pilgrimage 
through this world, viz., food and light, both of which are given 
us by God. We receive food to nourish our souls in the Holy 
Eucharist, and we find light to guide our steps through the dark- 
ness of life in God's holy Word. Food and light! they seem dis- 
tinct, and yet fundamentally they are one, since both reveal the 
truth, grace and love of God, the one under the form of bread, the 
other imder that of a written word. Love the Word of God, and 
read it with devotion, not from mere curiosity; learn from it how 
to know God’s will and how to lead good and holy lives. Ask God 
to enlighten you, and He will not refuse, for He desires to speak 
to you through Holy Scripture. Say, in the words of an old 
prayer: “O Lord Jesus Christ, enlighten my mind that I may under- 
stand Thy Word, and derive therefrom true contrition for my sins, 
and be inspired with fervent devotion. Teach me to turn what I 
read into heartfelt prayer and an edifying life, for happy is he 
whom Thou, O Lord, dost instruct iii tne way of Thy law.” Amen. 


12S 


REUGION; FAITH; THE CHURCH 


XVIIL Bible and Nature 

As St. John says, Holy Scripture is a river of living water, clear 
as crystal, flowing from the throne of God and of the Lamb. When 
we call it of divine origin, we do not mean that it dropped down 
from Heaven, and contains no human element. The Incarnate 
Son of God is at once God and Man, and in the same way Holy 
Scripture is at once divine and human. Being designed by God 
for men, it was His will that it should be written by men in the 
manner most natural to them; so He prompted men to write and 
told them what to say, taking care that their writings should express 
accurately His divine thoughts. In this sense God may be called 
the Author of Holy Scripture, and in this sense Holy Scripture is 
of divine origin; as St. Augustine says, it resembles a letter ad- 
dressed to men by God, through His secretaries. 

The contents of this letter do not find favor with some people, 
who consequently refuse to accept it, and deny that it comes from 
God. They regard the Bible as of merely human origin, containing, 
it is true, many beautiful things, but it is not divine, since, in their 
opinion, it is not free from errors. If we ask them how they know 
that there are mistakes in the Bible, they reply that there is another 
book, undoubtedly proceeding from God ; and the statements in this 
other work — the book of nature, are in many respects at variance 
with those in the Bible; in fact, there are manifest contradictions 
between the Bible and nature. ‘‘Look up,” they say, “to the stars, 
whose light takes thousands of years perhaps to reach our eyes; 
examine the formation of the earth, and the geological strata that 
require incalculable periods for their formation, and then open 
your Bible, and read therein how God created earth, sun, moon and 
stars only about 6,000 years ago, in the space of six days. How 


BIBLE AND NATURE 




is it possible nowadays to believe this? The conflict between the 
Bible and nature is inexplicable, and it is impossible to believe that 
the former contains the Word of God/' You have all heard lan- 
guage of this kind and the arguments used by unbelievers against 
the Bible and the Church. What can we answer? Surely, after 
what I said just now regarding the divine and human elements in 
Holy Scripture, you will not be at a loss how to refute these objec- 
tions. The subject, however, is so important that we must discuss 
it in some detail, but we may begin by asserting boldly that hitherto 
no real discrepancy between the Bible and nature has been proved 
to exist, nor will it be discovered in future, for it is impossible. 

1. There can be no real contradiction between the Bible and 
natural science. You know what the Bible is; the Church has 
solemnly defined it to be the Word of God, and Christians have 
always regarded it as such. No one professing to be a Christian 
can doubt that, being the Word of God, the Bible is true, for God 
is truth, and can neither lie nor be deceived. Hence it is impossible 
and inconceivable that there should be mistakes in the Bible. 
Nature too comes from God, and is, as it were, a book, given us by 
God. It is indeed a glorious book, and no error can possibly be 
found in it; its contents are true, and what we read in it actually 
exists. 

If, therefore, we find it recorded in this book that God's creation 
of the world covered vast periods of time, and if astronomy, 
geology and palaeontology all tell us the same thing, we know that 
it must be true, and we cannot doubt it. Some people in their 
anxiety to uphold the truth, as they understand it, of the Bible, 
argue thus: "Although from the condition of the earth's interior 
we learn that, in the ordinary course of affairs, the creation would 
have covered vast periods of time, it does not follow that this 


130 


RELIGION; FAITH; THE CHURCH 


really was the case, since God, whether He created the universe 
in six days or in a single moment, could create the various geological 
strata, that apparently require thousands of years for their forma- 
tion, and could set in the coal mines the fossil trees with the rings 
that mark their age. He is almighty and can work miracles.'' 
Language of this sort is foolish, for apart from the fact that such 
miracles would be quite exceptional, the outcome of caprice rather 
than of God’s wisdom and goodness, we are here concerned, as St. 
Augustine points out, not with discovering miracles and asking 
how God might have made the earth, but how He actually did 
make it. There can be no doubt that He made it in the way that 
we infer from its present form and condition; therefore, if nature 
asserts this with certainty. He made it, not in a few days, but in 
the course of ages. What we have said in this particular case is of 
universal application; the book of nature comes from God, and 
contains nothing but the truth. The Bible too contains nothing 
but the truth; one truth cannot contradict another; and what was 
true once, is true always, for God is truth, and He cannot change. 
From the fullness of His light He chose to allow two rays to pene- 
trate our minds, one through the Bible, the other through the book 
of nature. These rays cannot obscure each other; they must 
necessarily unite and produce a brighter light than either could 
produce singly. As the Council of Trent solemnly declared, God 
cannot contradict Himself, nor can one truth conflict with another. 

2. But if there is no antagonism between the Bible and natural 
science, what is the meaning of the objections so often raised by 
scientific men to the Bible? Although there is no real contradic- 
tion, it is quite possible that men may look at the same thing from 
different points of view, and explain it in ways that are plainly at 
variance. Supposing some one falls ill and consults a doctor, who 


BIBLE AND NATURE 


131 


says his digestion is out of order. He consults another physician, 
who pronounces the malady to be nervous. The case is not unusual, 
but the doctors disagree, one or other is wrong, or perhaps both are 
mistaken. In the same way there is no contradiction between 
knowledge and faith, between science and the Bible, but much 
depends upon the way in which we understand and explain them. 
The contradiction lies in the explanations given of the facts; the 
mistakes are due to the human element, not to the Bible or nature. 
Does it ever happen that a man makes mistakes in expounding the 
book of nature? We need not refer to those spurious scientists, 
who profess to have a little scientific knowledge when they want to 
attack the faith. As a rule, they know nothing at all. The ques- 
tion is: Do real students of nature ever fall into error? Of course 
they do ; a very superficial acquaintance with the history of natural 
science will supply us with many instances of mistakes made by 
genuine scholars. What is proved by all the various attempts made 
to accotmt for the shape of the earth, the origin of living creatures, 
the nature of light, etc.? In course of time many facts have been 
ascertained, but still the history of all these attempts is to a great 
extent a record of mistakes. Genuine scientists know this perfectly 
well, and therefore they are modest and diffident in their assertions, 
and tell us frankly that they may be mistaken, although they have 
apparently good ground for certainty. Let us now turn to the other 
side of the question, and ask whether it is possible to go wrong in 
interpreting the Bible. You know for yourselves, since it is a mat- 
ter of everyday experience, that those who talk most about con- 
tradictions between the Bible and science, betray amazing ignorance 
of religion and Holy Scripture, for they distort our doctrines and 
misrepresent the Bible. But do good Christians, who reverence 
God’s word, always interpret it correctly? No, for almost all 


132 


RELIGION; FAITH; THE CHURCH 


heretics have based their teaching on Holy Scripture, and even 
wise and learned men, who devote themselves to studying the Bible, 
have fallen into error. Some people have fancied that they were 
bound as Christians to believe that God created the world in six 
days of 24 hours each, and that the sun moves round the earth. 
They were wrong, for these are false statements and by no means 
the teaching of Holy Scripture. 

You see, therefore, that there need be no contradiction between 
the Bible and science, and that there can be none, since both contain 
the truth. We human beings, who so often blunder, are responsible 
for all the apparent contradiction — God is truth, but man is liable 
to error. 

3. Although there is no contradiction between the Bible and 
nature, we may err in our research into the mysteries of nature; 
and we may err likewise in our interpretation of Holy Scripture. 
For us Catholics it is of the utmost importance to avoid misinter- 
pretation, but it is not difficult for us to do so on matters of faith, 
since we need only consult the Church, to whom God Himself 
entrusted His Word, and who, being commissioned by Him, ex- 
pounds it with infallible accuracy. But what can we say regarding 
other points, which are not precisely matters of faith, especially 
those containing allusions to scientific subjects, such as frequently 
occur in Holy Scripture? What rule can we adopt for our guidance 
so as to avoid error? — First of all, we must not forget that to teach 
us science formed no part of God’s design, when He gave us His 
revelation in Holy Scripture ; He intended to teach us the one thing 
needful, viz., how to lead good lives and to reach Heaven. St. 
Augustine writes: “We do not read that our Lord promised to 
send the Holy Ghost to instruct us regarding the course of the sun 
and moon ; He wished to make us Christians, not mathematicians” 


BIBLE AND NATURE 


m 


(Augustin, de act. c. Fel. Man. 1, 9). We ought not, therefore, to 
try to discover secular science in the Bible, nor consult the Qiurch 
and the Fathers as to the interpretation of it on purely scientific 
matters, because the Church is commissioned to teach us no other 
science than that of salvation, and to make us Christians and noth- 
ing else. Wherever secular things are mentioned in Holy Scripture, 
we are free to accept any explanation that seems to us preferable 
for scientific reasons. St. Thomas remarks on this subject: ‘‘The 
Fathers were also free in this respect. It is a matter of faith that 
God made the world, and none of them deny it, but they differ in 
opinion as to the manner in which it was made, and the order in 
which the various creatures were created, and we too are at liberty 
to hold different views” (St. Thom., 2 dist. 12 q. 1. a. 2). In order 
to comprehend Holy Scripture we must observe this rule, and re- 
member that God gave the Bible to men through human agency; 
hence in it He speaks as men are in the habit of speaking, and in 
the way most intelligible to those whom He is primarily addressing. 
St. Jerome points out that “Holy Scripture states many things in 
accordance with the opinions of the period” (Hieron. in Jerem., 
28, 10) and St. Thomas says: “Moses was speaking to an unedu- 
cated multitude, and consequently he had to come down to their 
level, and discuss things more as they appear to be, than as they 
really are” (S. Thom., 1 q. 70 a. 1 ad 3). Thus in the book of 
Josue the sun is said to go round the earth, for all Jews thought 
that it did so, as indeed do most people even at the present day. — 
It behooves us to be cautious and even to distrust many of the so- 
called achievements of science ; they have not all been proved true, 
and what is accepted to-day may to-morrow be rejected as false. 
One thing, however, is certain, a truth cannot be antagonistic to 
faith. Let us, I repeat, be cautious. St. Augustine complains bit- 


134 


RELIGION; FAITH; THE CHURCH 


terly of the folly of those who appeal to Holy Scripture and religion 
in support of some opinion that non-Christians plainly perceive to 
be erroneous. “Fools,” he exclaims, “I wish they realized how 
much sorrow and embarrassment they cause to their more intelligent 
brethren by their talk!” “What does not with certainty belong 
to faith,” he continues, “and what in our sacred books admits of 
another interpretation, let us beware of deciding offhand, or m- 
deed at all. Let us beware of hastily adopting an opinion, and 
especially of trying to base upon our faith or upon Holy Scripture 
some theory that ultimately proves to be merely our own view, and 
liable to error” (Augustin, de Gen. ad lit. 1, 37 2 q). 

Yes, my brethren, let us be cautious ; we owe it to ourselves, our 
religion and the Bible, and also to those enemies of our faith who 
would be scandalized by precipitancy on our part. We must be 
careful not to make mistakes, but this does not mean that we need 
feel any alarm lest eventually some error should be discovered in 
Holy Scripture. No, there is no danger of that; Holy Scripture is 
not in peril. The sun would remain in the heavens, shedding heat 
and light on the earth, even though some foolish mortals might deny 
its existence and its beneficial influence ; and in the same way Holy 
Scripture stands firm, imparting light and life to men's minds. All 
sorts of things have been said and written against it, not only by 
the ignorant, but also by the learned, in every age since the days 
of Celsus and Porphyry, but in vain! No one has succeeded in 
discovering any mistake or statement irreconcilable with the ascer- 
tained results of human research. Not long ago, at an assembly 
of German scientists and physicians, some one said: “In the First 
Book of Moses we read : 'God said, let there be light, and light was 
made,’ but,” added the professor, “light did not dawn upon men, 
until the sanctity of the Bible was questioned, and it, like every other 


BIBLE AND NATURE 


135 


! 

book, was regarded as the work of men/’ — The unhappy man would 
have done better to abide by chemistry, and not to meddle with the- 
ology and philosophy. The greatest men of science have believed in 
the divine origin of Holy Scripture; Copernicus, Kepler, Newton, 
Ampere, Agassiz, Lyell, Faraday, Helmholtz, Liebig, Pasteur and 
Secchi were all believers, and we, who had the honor to be Secchi’s 
pupils, were often at a loss to decide which was most worthy of our 
admiration, — his profound learning or his child-like faith. Truly 
great scientists are not unbelievers ,* they have been well described 
as witnesses for God in the realm of nature; nor are they enemies 
of the Bible, for they know that there cannot be a real discrepancy 
between it and nature. A man, who possesses a mere smattering 
of scientific knowledge, may be in danger of losing his faith, but 
those who have studied deeply are led by science to God, the source 
of all science, as was said by Lord Bacon of Verulam, one of the 
chief pioneers of scientific research. 

To conclude : — The Bible and natural science are sisters, intended 
to live together in peace and harmony, for both proceed from God, 
and both ought to lead us to Him who is the truth. Amen. 


)36 


REUGION; FAITH; THE CHURCH 


XIX. Bible and Babel 

WHen a human being makes a statement, some one else may 
come forward and deny its truth; but no one can contradict God, 
who is infinitely wise and truthful. The Bible is His Word, and 
consequently it is true, now and for ever, although some people 
have opposed it, and declared that the stars in the sky, the interior 
of the earth, the evolution of plants and animals and the history 
of mankind all prove that it contains falsehoods. They say that 
the world took vast periods of time to come into being, that it has 
existed for thousands of years; and since the Bible contains a dif- 
ferent account of the matter, therefore the Bible is wrong. You 
heard last time that no real discrepancy is possible between the 
Bible and the book of nature, because both originate in God. It is, 
however, quite possible for men to err in reading the book of nature, 
and to misinterpret the Bible, and then contradictions arise, but 
men are to blame for them. It is of primary importance for us 
to accept with the greatest caution scientific statements that are 
alleged to be at variance with the Bible, and we must not expect 
to find in the Bible what God does not intend it to teach, remem- 
bering St. Augustine’s remark that He designed it to make us 
Christians, and not mathematicians or scientists. 

In recent years a certain learned professor in Berlin studied the 
cuneiform inscriptions on bricks and tiles discovered in burial 
places near the Euphrates and Tigris, where for more than 2,000 
years the mighty cities of Ninive and Babylon have lain in ruins. 
The professor, Delitzsch is his name, tried to prove that these 
records were of an earlier date than the Bible, and that the Bible 
repeated things that had been known in Babylon, that consequently 
these facts were not divinely revealed, and that, therefore, the Bible 


BIBLE AND BABEL 


157 


is not the Word of God. The professor’s theory was hailed with 
enthusiasm by the opponents of Christianity, who thought that he 
had finally disposed of the Bible — but this is by no means the case. 
The Bible is God’s Word, and will last for ever. But you have a 
right to ask how matters stand with this theory. It is difficult to 
give a brief answer, for volumes have been written on the subject ; 
nor is it easy to make my answer simple and intelligible to everyone, 
for a vast amount of learning has been displayed in dealing with 
this theory, but, if you will listen attentively, I will try to make 
you understand it. 

1. Have you ever heard of the Bender ah zodiac? It is fairly 
ancient history, but we shall do well to recall it. The zodiac is, as 
you know, the circle which the sun apparently makes in the course 
of a year, the parts of which are named the ‘"signs” of the zodiac. 
During Napoleon’s Egyptian campaign a representation of the zo- 
diac was discovered in the temple at Denderah, in Egypt. Learned 
men who examined it proceeded to determine its date. Some as- 
signed it to a period 1,000 B. C. ; others said 2,000; others 4,000, 
and one even thought 15,000 was nearer the mark. This seemed to 
dispose of the Bible, according to which only about 4,000 years 
elapsed between Adam and Christ. But in the midst of the exulta- 
tion over the alleged discovery of an error in the Bible, other 
scholars came forward to prove that the zodiac in question was 
not particularly ancient, and far from dating back to a period 
thousands of years B. C., it, like the temple in which it was found, 
belonged to the Christian era, as was conclusively proved by an 
inscription, previously overlooked, in the colonnade of the temple. 
Alas, what a crushing blow for our adversaries ! 

There is another story about Egypt that is rather amusing. We 
read in Genesis that camels formed part of the offering made by 


138 


RELIGION; FAITH; THE CHURCH 


the Egyptian king to Abraham. Some learned Egyptologist doubted 
whether camels existed in Egypt, and declared that there was no 
mention at all of a camel in all the hieroglyphs that have come down 
to us; therefore, he argued, there were no such animals in the 
country at that time. Consequently the Bible must be wrong, at 
least the book, which contains an allusion to camels, must be of 
much later date. Again, people smiled contemptuously at the Bible, 
until in some recent excavations an extremely ancient tomb was 
discovered, in which was found a vessel shaped in the form of a 
camel kneeling down to receive its load. No one knows precisely 
how old this vessel is, but some assign it to 4,000 B. C. This ‘‘pre* 
historic camel,” as it is called, can be seen in the Egyptian Museum 
of Berlin. We may, therefore, point to the Denderah zodiac and to 
the prehistoric camel, when people talk about other discoveries said 
to contradict the Bible. We are not bound to believe blindly all 
that modern scholars say about the significance, or the age, of 
recently discovered cuneiform inscriptions at Babylon. It is quite 
possible for them to be mistaken. Until a comparatively short time 
ago, no one could read these inscriptions, and while much has been 
accomplished by the genius and industry of scholars, the interpreta- 
tion is still uncertain, and the best scholars acknowledge that there 
is still much obscurity and many difficulties. To give you one 
instance of them, let me mention that in our languages we use 
some 25 or 26 letters, but the Assyrian-Babylonian script employs 
no less than 600 different signs, and 20,000 groups of signs or letters. 
How easily a misinterpretation may occur! Moreover, many of 
these signs denote sometimes a syllable, sometimes a whole word. 
How difficult it must be to read them correctly ! 

But even if we take it for granted that our scholars have made 
no mistakes and have read the inscriptions accurately, how are we 


BIBLE AND BABEL 


m 


to know that the facts recorded are true? You have seen that it 
is possible to misread even the book of nature, although its con- 
tents cannot be false. In the case of ancient inscriptions, we are 
not justified in assuming them to be invariably true; they are the 
work of human beings, who are liable to error. Why should we 
place implicit faith in the ancient Babylonians? Nations with the 
unbridled imagination of the East are not particularly trustworthy. 
Exaggerations and misstatements have been shown to exist in their 
cuneiform inscriptions, and no one is bound to believe them. It 
is a sad fact that many learned men, while accusing us of credulity, 
are themselves extremely credulous. They are ready enough to 
doubt what they read in the Bible, and to declare it untrue, although 
it is God's Word ; they think that thus they are acting scientifically 
and without bias; but if they catch sight of some ancient manu- 
script or stone inscription, they are carried away by enthusiasm, 
and proceed with the utmost assurance to decipher them, and wel- 
come the information thus obtained as most certainly true. Let 
them do as they please ; we are less credulous, and feel a wholesome 
distrust of new discoveries that are supposed to overthrow the 
Bible. 

2. Let us now return to Professor Delitzsch. His theory affects 
both, historical events recorded in the Bible, such as the Creation 
and the Deluge, and also its religious and ethical teaching. He 
believes it possible to show from the cuneiform inscriptions, that 
there were many points of resemblance between the Babylonian 
religion and that of the Bible, only the former was earlier and 
more perfect; hence, he argues, the Bible is not the word of God. 
There are undoubtedly points of resemblance; but there are also 
points of difference, which Delitzsch ignores. But why should 
there not be many points of resemblance? Did all the knowledge 


140 


RELIGION; FAITH; THE CHURCH 


possessed by mankind after their expulsion from Paradise perish 
from among their descendants? When Abraham quitted his home 
in Babylonia, did he carry with him none of the knowledge that 
was an inheritance common to the race? Human nature is the 
same everywhere, so we need not be surprised if everywhere similar 
religious views and moral laws prevail. 

‘‘But," says Delitzsch, “the Babylonian records are older than the 
Bible." It has been clearly proved that this is not universally true ; 
some of them may be older, but what of it ? As you know, the Bible 
does not consist solely of revelations regarding things previously 
unknown. Moses and the other authors may already have known 
much of what they wrote, and may have derived their knowledge 
either from some primitive revelation or elsewhere, possibly from 
Egypt, where Moses was educated, and possibly also from Baby- 
lonia, whence Abraham had come. This proves nothing at all 
against the Bible, which proceeds from God, not from Egypt or 
Babylonia, and it was God who prompted Moses and the others 
to write. But what can be said in answer to the assertion that 
the Babylonian version is better, purer, more perfect, than that 
given by the Bible? If I were to read you what these Babylonian 
records say about the Creation, and the fall of man, how the gods 
gather like flies about the freshly slain sacrifice, how they quarrel 
with goddesses, how they drink until intoxicated, etc., you would 
either feel disgusted or you would burst out laughing. Compare 
all this with the dignified simplicity of the Bible : “In the beginning 
God created heaven and earth. And God said : Be light made. And 
light was made. And God saw that it was good." 

Delitzsch fancies that the Babylonian conception of the God- 
head was peculiarly perfect; but I have just told you about these 
queer deities, and it is difficult to see how, nevertheless, they be- 


BIBLE AND BABEL 


141 


i lieved in one true God. Still, if they did so, it proves nothing 
against the Bible, it only shows that they had preserved this par- 
ticular belief. There is, however, no evidence that they believed in 
the unity and sanctity of God; on the contrary, they seem to have 
lapsed into a debased kind of polytheism, and it was in order to 
protect Abraham from this that God bade him go forth from his 
country, his kindred and his father’s house. 

Lastly, a comparison is drawn between the moral teaching of 
the Babylonians and that of the Bible. Human nature did not be- 
come utterly corrupt after the fall, and the moral law is written in 
man's conscience, which tells him what is right and what is wrong ; 
and no one is so degraded as to be incapable of doing anything good. 
Moses has been compared with the Babylonian legislator Ham- 
murabi, who was a contemporary of Abraham, and it is suggested 
that Moses simply copied Hammurabi. The latter's laws contain 
much that is commendable on the subject of right and justice, and, 
as I have pointed out, this is not surprising. The two codes differ, 
nevertheless, very greatly. For instance, Hammurabi speaks of 
marriage as a purely secular contract, Moses regards it as sanctified 
by religion; Hammurabi sanctions the intermarriage of near rela- 
tives, Moses forbids it. Hammurabi imposes no penalty upon 
incest, Moses condemns offenders to death. If we look at the 
worship of God, man's higher duty, what do we find? The Baby- 
lonians prayed and offered sacrifice to their gods, but their whole 
worship was a mass of magic, witchcraft and superstition. To the 
Israelites, on the contrary, God said through Moses: “The soul 
that shall go aside after magicians and soothsayers ... I will set 
my face against that soul, and destroy it out of the midst of its 
people” (Levit., xx, 6). Many years afterward, when the Jews 
were in danger of being infected with the vices of Babylon, the 


142 


RELIGION; FAITH; THE CHURCH 


prophets lifted up their voices and cried : “Hearken not to diviners 
and dreamers and soothsayers and sorcerers” (Jen, xxvii, 9). 

Here lies the great difference between the Bible and Babylon. 
One is like a serene summer day, on which the sun shines brightly ; 
the other is a cloudy night, with here and there a star to pierce the 
darkness. Anyone who, after comparing the two, prefers Babylon, 
must be overhasty in his judgment. The excavations and dis- 
coveries near the Tigris and Euphrates have proved nothing against 
the Bible, but rather the reverse. Those silent stones, picked up 
here and there, bear testimony to it. The Bible does not need their 
evidence, for God requires no witness. Yet we may call upon those 
very inscriptions as witnesses for the Bible. Vigouroux, a French 
explorer, has written a work in which he shows how the statements 
made by the writers of the Bible are confirmed and elucidated by 
recent discoveries in Palestine, Egypt and Assyria. We have al- 
ready heard about “the prehistoric camel” ; — ^here is another, some- 
what similar instance. In the book of Genesis there are references 
to grapes, wine, and Pharao's cupbearer. Critics have pointed out 
that Herodotus and Plutarch both deny that wine was made in 
Egypt; consequently, say the critics, the Bible is wrong. But re- 
cently, in burial chambers in the pyramids, representations have 
been discovered of vines, and of the treading of the wine-press; 
they are so clear that no one could possibly fail to recognize them. 
Again, doubts were cast upon the tasks imposed upon the Israelites 
in Egypt, but now pictures have been found showing men engaged 
in brick making and their overseers; we seem to be able to watch 
the Israelites at work. There are many other instances to which 
I might refer, but it is unnecessary— God and the Bible have no 
need of human testimony, yet the testimony exists, and it is all in 
support of the Bible. 


THE BIBLE AND THE CHURCH 




XX. The Bible and the Church 

Three wise men once came from the East, i. e., as many people 
think, from the region of the Euphrates and Tigris. Guided by a 
star, they came to Bethlehem, and adored a new-born Infant, offer- 
ing Him myrrh, gbld and frankincense. The myrrh signified that they 
recognize Him as man, subject to death; the gold that they honored 
Him as king; the frankincense that they worshipped Him as God. 
On the banks of the Euphrates and Tigris, in what was formerly 
Babylonia, all sorts of discoveries have been made recently; the 
inscriptions on bricks and tiles have been compared with the 
Bible, and our opponents have exclaimed in triumph, that the 
Bible was copied from Babylonian records, and that, therefore, 
Babel was greater than the Bible. I showed you last time how 
foolish and overhasty such statements were, and that no genuine 
scholar could possibly subscribe to them. Long before the Baby- 
lonian inscriptions were discovered, we knew and acknowledged 
that the Bible was written for men through the agency of men, 
who no doubt already were aware of much that they recorded, 
having learnt it from some primitive revelation or tradition, or 
through Abraham's bringing it from Babylonia to Canaan, or 
through Moses, who was educated in Egypt. In this sense the Bible 
is of human origin; no other book, however, approaches it in the 
majesty and sanctity of its teaching; it surpasses all the rest, even 
the code of Hammurabi the Babylonian, who so suddenly became 
famous. It is easy enough to account for its superiority, which is 
due to the influence of the Holy Spirit, since the men, who wrote 
the Bible, wrote under the inspiration and with the assistance of 
God. Outwardly the Child at Bethlehem resembled other children, 
although He was in reality divine, and the fullness of the God- 


144 


RELIGION; FAITH; THE CHURCH 


head dwelt in Him; and, in the same way, Holy Scripture is in 
very truth God’s word, and, therefore, divine and worthy of all 
reverence. Such is the doctrine of the Church and our own belief 
regarding the Bible, and all arguments against it are futile. 

One more objection, however, is sometimes brought forward, and 
people say : “If the Bible is divine, and really contains God’s word, 
and is, as it were, a letter addressed by Him to mankind, why does 
not the Catholic Church set a higher value on Bible reading and 
recommend it more emphatically? Has she not more than once 
expressly forbidden it? Why was the Bible practically unknown 
before the 16th Century, when it was rediscovered and placed in 
the hands of Christians ?” — These questions need an answer. 

1. The Church is said to have forbidden Bible reading; — is 
this really the case? No, she has never done so, and any one, 
who makes such an assertion, ought to state precisely when, where 
and by whom the alleged prohibition was issued. No one can do 
this, for the simple reason that no such prohibition exists. On 
the contrary, the Church more than once, more even than a hundred 
times, has recommended the study of the Bible, and attached in- 
dulgences to it. It is true that she has often regulated the manner 
in which this study was to be conducted, and we shall soon see j 
why she made these regulations. | 

In 1199 the Bishop of Metz wrote to Pope Innocent III., telling I 
him that in his diocese a number of the faithful had caused the 
Bible to be translated into French, and read this translation at \ 
thefr secret assemblies, where even laymen and women expounded ; 
it, and refused to listen to the priests’ remonstrances. The Pope j 
thought respect for Holy Scripture highly commendable, but con- j 
demned this proceeding as quite irregular. — About 1400 Wyclif \ 
tried to circulate a bad translation of the Bible in England, and { 


THE BIBLE AND THE CHURCH 


145 


taught that God had commanded every individual to read Holy 
Scripture. The bishops in England protested against Wyclif’s 
action. — As late as the year 1519 Luther wrote to the Pope: “In 
they voice, most holy Father, I recognize the voice of Christ’’; 
but when the Pope refused to countenance his heretical teaching, 
Luther became an apostate, and in 1530 declared that Holy Scrip- 
ture, not the Church, was the source and rule of faith. This 
doctrine led to Luther’s condemnation. — ^You see therefore that 
these heretics believed Holy Scripture to be, not only sufficient, 
but indispensable to salvation, and considered it possible and ob- 
ligatory for each man to derive his own faith from its pages. 
Moreover some translations were not trustworthy, and the Church, 
being opposed to all exaggeration, and the divinely appointed 
guardian of truth, could not let such dangers and disastrous errors 
pass unnoticed. No one however can assert that when she pro- 
tested against error, she condemned Holy Scripture or the legit- 
imate use of the same. There are laws controlling the use of 
articles of food, but they do not forbid us to eat; and the laws 
regulating the sale of intoxicants are an excellent instance of what 
I mean. — So are the laws against adulteration, which certainly are 
not the outcome of any failure to appreciate the importance of 
good food. — What I want you to understand is this: The Bible 
is a most valuable source of divine revelation, but it is not the 
only one, nor does is contain everything that we are bound to 
believe. A book, not being alive, cannot direct our faith, and 
Christ appointed as our guide a living teacher. He sent out His 
apostles to preach and instruct all nations, and St. Paul declares 
that faith cometh by preaching and by listening to the word 
of God. The Church is bound to take action, not against the 
Bible, but against those who accept no authority but that of the 


r46 RELIGION; FAITH; THE CHURCH 

Bible, and thus wrongly employ it as an instrument for the de- 
struction of Christianity, as understood by Christ. — The Bible is 
by no means indispensable to every individual. It was written 
for the benefit of all, but this does not mean that everyone ought 
to read it. You all benefit by the laws of your country, but you 
are not bound to read and study the laws for yourselves; very 
few of you would take the trouble to do so. Long before the 
books of the New Testament were generally known, millions were 
converted to Christianity. Tertullian writes: ‘‘Christ did not say 
to the man sick of the palsy : ‘Bible-reading hath made thee whole,* 
but: ‘Thy faith hath made thee whole’* {De praescript. 14). St. 
Ambrose speaks of the Bible as a book for priests. St. Augustine 
says that it was entrusted to priests and bishops, in order that 
they might instruct others {De doctr. chr. 1. 39). The Church 
in every age has insisted that those, whose duty it is to teach 
others, are bound not only to read, but to study and meditate upon 
Holy Scripture, and make it their own, by imbibing its spirit. 
If you were to visit a seminary and look at the syllabus, you would 
find more than one professor appointed to expound Holy Scrip- 
ture. In the lectures on doctrine you would always hear reference 
made to the Bible, and as a rule such references are discussed 
very fully. The Church has always been careful that the Bible 
shall be studied; she has even instituted the office of Lector or 
Reader, one of the Minor Orders, for this purpose, and at his 
ordination she hands to the Deacon the book of the Gospels, a 
beautiful symbol of his holy office, whilst she lays it even on the 
head and shoulders of a bishop. The Breviary and Missal con- 
sist for the most part of extracts from Holy Scripture. The 
Church undoubtedly values the Bible very highly, but she does not 
make it a monopoly for the priests; she wishes us to study it 


THE BIBLE AND THE CHURCH 


147 


for your sake and for your advantage. You can adopt the words 
that St. Paul used of Timothy, and say that from childhood you 
have known Holy Scripture. As little children you were told 
about Paradise, the fall of man, Joseph the patriarch, the holy 
Child Jesus, and our Saviour’s Passion. Every Sunday you hear 
the Gospel for the day, and the principal sermon is bound, accord- 
ing to rules laid down by the Council of Trent, to be an explana- 
tion of the Gospel; in fact every sermon is based on Holy Scrip- 
ture. It is precisely because the Church desires her children to 
enjoy the benefits of Holy Scripture, that she guards it with such 
jealous care. No more ardent lover of the Bible ever lived than 
St. Jerome, who writes thus to Laeta: ''May thy daughter delight 
in the Psalms, and never lay aside the Gospel; may she esteem 
manuscripts of our sacred books above jewels and silken garments.” 
Nevertheless the saint was far from willing that every chance 
person should expound the Bible. He exclaims indignantly : "Only 
a carpenter understands carpentry; only a physician practices the 
art of healing, and shall every crazy man, every talkative woman, 
every wordy sophist, everyone, in short, indiscriminately expound 
Holy Scripture, without having learnt it?” (Hieron. ad Paulin. Ep. 
53, 7). Such is the opinion of the Church also; she cherishes a 
tender affection, but, at the same time, a profound reverence for 
Holy Scripture, and combines these feelings with motherly care 
for her children’s welfare. She does not allow anyone to touch 
the Lord’s Body in the Blessed Sacrament, save those whose hands 
are consecrated; and in the same way, she allows none to expound 
Holy Scripture save those whose lips have been cleansed as with 
a glowing coal, and to whom Christ Himself has said: "Go and 
teach all nations.” 

2. But, it may be asked, how was it that, if the Church venerated 


148 


RELIGION; FAITH; THE CHURCH 


Holy Scripture so profoundly, it had become an unknown book, 
and had to be rediscovered by the so-called Reformers of the 16th 
Century? Luther declared that for centuries the Bible had lain 
under the bench, whence he himself brought it to light. The same 
language is often heard at the present day, but there is no more 
truth in it than in that other assertion that, at the time of the 
Vatican Council in 1870, no Bible could be found in Rome, except 
in the house of a Protestant Chaplain. This assertion is so ab- 
solutely absurd that we need not waste time in discussing it, and 
LuthePs remark is equally ridiculous; it is in fact one of those 
‘^thumping lies,” in which Luther tells us he indulged, when it 
suited him. No sooner had he uttered it and produced his trans- 
lation, than Zwingli, a Swiss reformer, whose testimony was cer- 
tainly beyond suspicion, asked: “But did not others, men such as 
Erasmus and Valla, precede you? What could you have accom- 
plished without them? I will spare you, my dear Luther, but 
you really deserve to be well flogged.” What about the 400 edi- 
tions printed in the 50 odd years between the invention of printing 
and Luther’s translation ? In High German there were fourteen and 
in Low German four complete editions of the Bible, besides numer- 
ous editions of separate books. A Protestant scholar like Bunsen 
frankly admits Luther’s translation to be the most inaccurate of 
all. Emendation is required in 3000 places, and the worst feature 
in his work is that he has deliberately falsified the text, in order 
to foist upon it his own heretical doctrines. For instance, where 
St. Paul says that we are justified by faith, Luther does not hes- 
itate to interpolate the word “alone,” so that the passage reads: 
by faith alone. When this falsification was pointed out to him, 
he fell, as usual, into a violent rage, and said: “Doctor Martin 
Luther intends it to stand thus, and declares a papist and an ass 


THE BIBLE AND THE CHURCH 


149 


to be one and the same thing ; I will have it so ; my will is law.’^ 
Later on, he took still further liberties with it, and where it was 
not in agreement with his doctrines, he simply said that he did not 
care about it at all. He rejected the Epistle of St. James, and 
called it ‘*the Epistle of straw,” because in it the Apostle speaks 
clearly of the necessity of good ‘works. Luther's successors have 
only acted consistently in going still further, in denying the inspira- 
tion of the Bible, and in rejecting passages and books as spurious, 
until finally very little is left except the cover, although meantime 
they continue to swear by the Bible and to find fault with us for 
not appreciating it. Whoever hears what they say, and is satisfied 
to accept them at their own valuation, may really suppose that 
non-Catholics respect the Bible very highly. They spend large 
sums of money and display great zeal in printing and distributing 
it. On March 5th, 1904, they celebrated the Jubilee of the so-called 
Bible Societies, and it was then announced that the “British and 
Foreign Bible Society,” founded in 1804, had in 1902 an income 
of £250,000 or 1,250,000 dollars. During the hundred years of its 
existence it had distributed 181 million copies of the Bible in more 
than 350 languages and dialects, at a cost of over £13,000,000. At 
the jubilee celebration there was a great children's festival in Lon- 
don, at which 12,000 children were present, who feasted on eight 
cwt. of dainties, in addition to which there was an enormous cake, 
weighing 1 cwt., adorned with the inscription : “Heaven and earth 
shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away.” All this was 
considered very imposing, and we might rejoice over such a dis- 
play of zeal and respect for Holy Scripture, did not many sorrow- 
ful thoughts obtrude themselves, and suggest the questions : “How 
many heathens have really become good Christians as a result of 
all this expenditure? Is this ostensible reverence for the Bible 


110 


RELIGION; FAITH; THE CHURCH 


genuine? Is it true that the word of God ha§ not passed away 
from the countries where the Bible Societies flourish?'* Any cam 
did observer would have to confess that it has indeed passed away, 
like the cake and the dainties consumed by the children at the 
Jubilee. What an irony of fate! Luther is said to have re^ 
discovered the Bible, but among the Protestant theologians whq 
are his followers, few still believe in it. Most of them look upoq 
it as not divine, and the few who still cling to it, are deeply pained 
at the manner in which their colleagues treat Holy Scripture. When 
in 1893 the Holy Father issued his magnificent encyclical on the 
Bible, an Anglican loudly proclaimed his delight and gratitude, ex-- 
tolling the encyclical as a splendid and courageous confession of 
faith in the midst of a world of science and unbelief, and he went 
on to point out what he considered a remarkable change of policy, 
inasmuch as Protestants of all denominations were disparaging the 
Bible, and doing their best to undermine all faith in it, whilst the 
Pope in Rome came forward declaring it to be divine and free 
from error, thus reviving hope in hearts that were on the point of 
breaking. This is an interesting statement, but the Anglican writer 
is mistaken in thinking that there has been any change of policy 
on the part of Rome. Leo XIII . held precisely the same views as 
all his predecessors; the Popes and the Catholic Church have ever 
been the watchful guardians of Holy Scripture; they have re- 
spected it, believed in it, and insisted upon its divine origin. 

If ever you have been present at a solemn High Mass, you must 
have seen before the Gospel the deacon bending low in prayer, then 
,he takes the book from the altar, chants the heading, and makes 
the sign of the cross on his brow, mouth and breast. The faithful 
stand up, and the deacon takes the censor and incenses thrice the 
hook of the Gospels, just as the Blessed Sacrament is incensed, 


THE BIBLE AND THE CHURCH 


m 


because what he is about to read is God's Word. You see with 
what respect the Church treats the Gospel. When you stand to 
hear it, make the sign of the cross on your brow in token that you 
will always believe it as it is interpreted by Holy Church; make 
the same sign on your lips and promise that you will always profess 
your faith in it before men; and lastly make the sacred sign on 
your breast, and pledge yourselves to live in conformity with the 
teaching of God’s holy Word. Thus will Holy Scripture be to you 
a source of comfort, joy and blessing. It may happen that our 
hearts are troubled by doubts and fears, and then we shall find 
peace in the Word of God. Lacordaire, the famous Dominican, 
was in early life tormented by doubts regarding the faith. After- 
wards he was asked what he had done, and what books he had 
read, in order to get rid of them. He replied that one day, whilst 
reading the Gospel, he realized its beauty, and was so deeply touched 
that tears filled his eyes; he wept, and thenceforth had faith. 

My Brethren, be diligent in hearing and reading the word of 
God; the Church as a loving mother offers you this divine book 
and rejoices when you read it in the right way; that is to say, with 
the cross on your brow, in token of humble faith; with the cross 
on your lips, as a proof of courage to confess your faith ; and with 
the cross on your breast and in your heart, as a pledge of your 
determination to lead a Christian life. Amen. 


152 


RELIGION; FAITH; THE CHURCH 


XXI. Tradition as a Source of Faith 

We have seen that Holy Scripture is a book of divine orighi, 
written for men through human agency, but God prompted the 
authors to write and inspired them with what they were to say ; He 
therefore speaks to us in Holy Scripture. — But does the Bible con- 
tain the whole of God’s revelation ? is it the only source whence we 
learn His truths ? and are we consequently bound to believe nothing 
but what we find in it ? These questions are answered in the affirma- 
tive by the followers of those who in the 16 th century cut themselves 
off from the Catholic Church. Before the Reformation all Chris- 
tians would have answered them in the negative, as Catholics still 
do. The great Council of Trent and the Vatican Council both 
plainly declared the Bible not to be the sole rule of faith, since 
“supernatural revelation is contained in the written books of Holy 
Scripture, and in traditions that are not written, but were learnt by 
the apostles from the lips of Christ, or were handed down from the 
apostles under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, and so have come 
down to us.” These traditions may have been recorded in writing, 
but they do not occur in Holy Scripture. We find them in the 
works of the Fathers, on the walls of the catacombs, in the decisions 
of councils, and in the prayers, hymns and customs of the Church, 
and they are divine truths. Therefore Holy Scripture is not the 
only source of our faith, but, in making this admission, we do not 
detract from the reverence due to it. On the contrary, we look upon 
the Bible as a divine book, and we certainly honor it more than do 
those who talk a great deal about it, and believe that it contains the 
whole of God’s revelation. Whilst we revere the Bible, we must 
still cling to the truth, epecially with regard to those fundamental 
matters on which Christianity and our own salvation depend. The 


TRADITION AS A SOURCE OF FAITH 


153 


truth is that the Bible does not contain all that God chose to reveal 
to us ; tradition also is a source of revealed truth. 

1. A man who makes an important assertion, must not expect to 
be believed off-hand, especially if what he asserts is something new 
and previously unknown. It is his business to prove what he de- 
clares to be true. Now, Protestants say that Holy Scripture con- 
tains the whole of God^s revelation, but can they prove it? All 
Christians agree that revealed truths are found in the Bible, but 
that all the truths ever revealed by God to man are to be found in 
it, was a new doctrine, which Protestants have been trying in vain 
to prove for the last three hundred years. Only one kind of proof 
would be satisfactory. — Since it is with them an article of faith that 
the Bible contains all revealed truths, every article of faith must 
necessarily be found in the Bible, and consequently they ought to 
be able to prove from the Bible that it contains the whole of God’s 
revelation. But they cannot do this, and thus they contradict them- 
selves. We are justified in arguing with them in this way: You 
tell us that we ought to believe nothing that is not in Holy Scripture. 
Now it is nowhere stated in Holy Scripture that the Bible is the sole 
source of revealed truth; therefore you ought not to believe it. 
Since you, do believe it, you are flatly contradicting yourselves. — 
Again : We know that Holy Scripture contains the Word of God, 
because tradition and the Church tell us that it is so; but how do 
you Protestants know it? How do you prove it? According to 
your own theory you ought to prove it from the Bible ; but where, 
for instance, will you find it stated that the Gospel according to St. 
Matthew forms part of Holy Scripture and contains the Word of 
God? It is not stated anywhere in the Bible, therefore you cannot 
prove it; and if you cannot prove it, how can you believe it? Is 
this not another instance of self-contradiction? — A Catholic scholar 


RELIGION; FAITH; THE CHURCH 


IS4 

once made a Protestant grasp this fact by using the following device : 
The Protestant was speaking against tradition, so the Catholic asked 
for a copy of the Bible, and turned over the pages, first of the Old, 
and then of the New Testament. Finally he handed the book back, 
saying: *T want a copy of Holy Scripture, and not this fabulous 
book.” — *'But that is a copy of Holy Scripture,” replied the Pro- 
testant. *Ts it?” said the Catholic, *‘how do you know that it is?” — 
'‘How do I know? Why, I have the testimony of our forefathers, 
who from age to age, from generation to generation, have regarded 
and revered this book as Holy Scripture.” “A capital answer,” cried 
the Catholic, '‘you know it not from the Bible itself, but from oral 
tradition.” Nothing could be said against this argument; Protes- 
tants are quite unable to prove that the Bible contains the whole of 
God's Word, or that it contains it at all, and their teaching on the 
subject is most contradictor)% whereas our faith is, as St. Paul says, 
reasonable, and we cannot be forced to believe such senseless and 
contradictory statements. Hence we shall never believe that we are 
bound to accept only what we find in the Bible. 

2. It is difficult to see how any one could have supposed that 
God, in making his revelation, had limited Himself to His written 
word. It seems, humanly speaking, not even probable, when we 
think of Christ and the apostles. Our Lord was of course acquainted 
with the Old Testament; He quoted it frequently, and more than 
once bade His hearers search the scriptures. But He appealed to it 
only in support of His oral teaching, and He never wrote anything. 
He, the God who made the revelation, knew best how to proceed, 
and, realizing the force of the living word, regarded written docu- 
ments as subsidiary to speech. He travelled about with His dis- 
ciples, and, as the evangelists tell us. He opened his mouth and 
taught the multitude. The words of Divine love and wisdom flowed 


TRADITION AS A SOURCE OF FAITH lU 

from His lips, and were eagerly received by His hearers, enlighten- 
ing their minds and inflaming their hearts. He stood face to face 
with those whom He was addressing, and instructed them by means 
of the spoken, not the written, word. And, what was more, He 
charged the apostles to do likewise; they were to go all over the 
world, teaching all nations, and St. Mark tells us that they “preached 
everywhere.” At first they had no idea of writing, although ere 
long, they were moved by the Holy Ghost to write. Still, even then 
they had no intention of writing down all that Christ had taught and 
the Holy Ghost revealed to them. In compliance with the desire 
and request of the faithful, they recorded the chief of His dis- 
courses and acts, in order that these might not be forgotten, when 
those who had known Him personally passed away. After all, not 
very much was written — only the four Gospels and the Acts of the 
Apostles, and the evangelists were far from intending to give a com- 
plete account of their Master’s life; on the contrary, St. John says 
at the end of his Gospel : “There are also many other things which 
Jesus did, which if they were written every one, the world itself, I 
think, would not be able to contain the books that should be written.” 
— ^We have also the epistles, i. e., letters written by the apostles as 
occasion offered, often in reply to some definite questions put to 
them, but certainly not with any idea of recording all that Christians 
were bound to observe and believe. St. Paul, in writing to the 
Thessalonians, says : “Brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions 
which you have learned, whether by word or by our epistle” 
(2 Thess., ii, 14). The great St. John Chrysostom, whose own love 
and reverence for Holy Scripture knew no bounds, remarks, in com- 
menting on this passage: “The words 'Hold the traditions’ show 
that the Apostles did not transmit everything to us in writing, but 
taught much without writing. This too deserves our belief ; it is a 


156 


RELIGION; FAITH; THE CHURCH 


tradition, and that suffices.” St. John, the beloved disciple, in his 
second epistle, admonishes^ his followers to ‘^continue in the doc- 
trine of Christ,” and adds : “Having more things to write unto you, 
I would not by paper and ink ; for I hope that I shall be with you, 
and speak face to face.” Remember these words : not by paper and 
ink, but face to face. 

This then was Christ’s method, and the apostles adopted it from 
Him. Many thousands were converted to Christianity before a 
word of the New Testament was written, and since then millions, 
most of them unable to read, have received the faith simply through 
the spoken word. We take up our stand with Christ, the Apostles, 
and the millions of Christians who have preceded us, and we, like 
them, proclaim loudly and solemnly, that, though Holy Scripture is 
glorious and Divine, it does not contain all that we are required to 
believe, and is not the sole source of our faith. 

3. Holy Scripture certainly does not contain the whole of God's 
revelation, and it is a remarkable fact that those who profess to 
regard it as the sole source of their faith, nevertheless accept many 
truths and precepts as emanating from Christ, in spite of their not 
occurring in the Bible. It is impossible to prove from the Bible 
either which books ought to be included in it, or that Holy Scripture 
as a whole is inspired and divine. No wonder the Protestants, who 
reject tradition and yet wish to be logical, have to a great extent 
abandoned the doctrine regarding the divine origin of Holy Scrip- 
ture. — Most Protestants agree with us in thinking that infants can 
receive valid baptism, yet there is nothing about it in the Bible, and 
one passage seems opposed to it. Our Lord ordered His disciples to 
teaoh and baptize, which looks as if those only could be baptized 
who were capable of previous instruction. The Baptists and Men- 


TRADITION AS A SOURCE OF FAITH 


157 


nonites therefore are quite consistent in rejecting infant baptism. — 
Again, where is it stated in Holy Scripture that baptism by sprink- 
ling is valid? What does it tell us about the administration of the 
Holy Eucharist? Does it not explicitly enjoin the washing of feet? 
Does it not forbid the eating or drinking of blood? Are not oaths 
apparently prohibited? And is not the Sabbath required to be ob- 
served? Only a few Protestants, such as the Mennonites, consider 
themselves bound by all these laws; whence do all the rest learn 
that they have ceased to be binding? We Catholics know well 
enough; as St. John Chrysostom says: “It is a tradition’^; and on 
these points we interpret Holy Scripture by the light of tradition; 
but how can those, who reject tradition, believe and act quite other- 
wise than Holy Scripture seems to demand? If they gave an honest 
answer to this question, they would be forced to confess that there 
are doctrines and laws, really taught by Christ, that cannot with 
certainty be shown to exist in the Bible, and that we know only from 
tradition ; and there is also more than one passage in the Bible quite 
inexplicable without the aid of tradition. Thus Protestants really 
agree with us in denying the Bible to be the sole source of faith, 
and in recognizing tradition, i e., the truths which the Apostles learnt 
from our Saviour or through the Holy Ghost, and which have re- 
mained from generation to generation in the religious consciousness 
of Christians. We believe that a recognition of tradition is essential 
to Christianity, and in accordance with the designs of God and of 
our Lord Jesus Christ. 

It is. not quite correct to say that Holy Scripture and tradition 
stand side by side ; both are necessary, but this is not an accurate 
account of their relation to each other. Faith is sometimes called 
an edificeand God Himself compares revealed religion with a house, 
the foundation of which is Christ. The house seems to consist of 


158 


RELIGION; FAITH; THE CHURCH 


two stories, of which the lower is tradition and the upper is Holy 
Scripture. The upper story may be more attractive, but the lower 
is more necessary, since it supports the other. Protestantism ignored 
the lower, and tried to inhabit only the upper story, and the inevitable 
result followed ; as soon as the lower was undermined, the upper fell 
with it, and hence many even of the wisest men, who profess to 
teach and guide others, now deny Holy Scripture to be the Word 
of God. We, Catholics, however, accept the house as God gave it to 
us ; we inhabit both stories, but chiefly the lower, for it is clear that 
without tradition there can be no Christianity and no Holy Scrip- 
ture; though we are far from undervaluing the upper story in which 
God speaks to us directly in His inspired books. Those of us who 
have to instruct others go up daily to the upper story to breathe the 
pure air of heaven and listen to God’s voice. But we shall never be 
so foolish as to try to alter the house that He designed; we shall 
beware of making violent changes, as others have done, in its lower 
story. On the contrary, we shall dwell contentedly on this more 
humble, but safer and more convenient level, and with obedience 
and faith accept what God’s Holy Church teaches us about Him. 
Amen. 




















/ 




> 

t 

■■ r 





TT 


M ^ \ % •w- Vi 
















r *iw-> * ' n’q 

■?V •‘•y 


*t 


I’^’V • •< 

1^-^ * 






•^1 


•' *.« 


•Ji f / -• 




.*r^ 








[i i 










% f ' ‘ t * - 


• /fc 'I 1 

, *,•'3 % ^ 


M 


P V > 


'<\r 


:,y5 


J r. 


^11 


m \i *' 


i ■ . 


'V 


iv 


y 








iffl. 


-• I 






*-. 


iSTt: 


^ il 


7; 


r.^i- ' 






1 


i Jj 




>4 








* r 


'Cf i 






‘1: 


r '- 1 


^i. 


- 


A 


4|- 




O 


TP!. ’I '■ ’■:■■' 

)i±jrr. ,..«. 

- -Sr 


•'• I » 


1 


^ .’tv' 


KT; 


X ^ • 


1 f t V 


Ut 


\ .1 


f I 






*:i^ 




« -» 


A 


'J 




fe ‘ « i: 

it' ' j ' 




’•» ♦ 


wv 


1 


im] 


• ‘ .A ^ 

■ v.vj 


iV 


l» -V 

Ysf 


*»/ 




’ V'-^ - ' 

J?" .\ y . I 


, I . f 


<<■ 


; V 4 » . I 4 


'?4r> -♦* 


I .. 


* » 


, ,/. , *<1' 




p? 

y'-'jv -l'^. 


iL.2 


;j 




Lr. 


S. 


Mp 




’W>i:'-. 




C 


31^1 .. • W •■' '* 

■ . f'’ 

' . f f ."i 






^v. ■’ 


t. ■‘S' 


‘#.•1 


-■s^' 


^.v 


A 


.1 




■ -f'- i. 


^ j^MI 




,.A 




/ j- 


'»C4 


* 9 




->1 


"A- 


■rr 


4 ' ;Jj! 

:i'* . At- 


• >•« 


f --*^i 


•/V , . . 


•♦ c 


4% r; 






V 




!»< 




:■ n^'-w 

' -iAi./i!u ■-.■S J-f^L 


if- 


V- 






♦J® 


If 


.i 








Tl 






•t 






/? 


V « A 




Sf 


t ' »■ 






Av 










U' 


k-if- 


J. 








•> * 




4l 7 


V »y 










.1 


kr., 




:4^£ 


ti MLaL^' - 'wt V 

.1* *• iJ'/ 


v-i 




S VJ 






•« % 




'•J .A _ 


itl 


I V 

^ LJ 





Deacidified using the Bookkeeper process. 
Neutralizing agent: Magnesium Oxide 
Treatment Date: August 2005 

PreservationTechnologies 

A WORLD LEADER IN PAPER PRESERVATION 

111 Thomson Park Drive 




